Programming might become writing functions by specifying them in natural language in a way that correctly states the inputs and desired outputs. Still requires algorithmic thinking, just at a higher level of abstraction. Like moving from assembly code to Python.

No, you know good and well that if you or I tried to get WT charges pressed against someone, the cops would laugh right in your face. This was done solely in retaliation for evidencing the cops bad behavior.

Just the fact that they have possession of these long enough to have that done is horrifying mishandled. They frankly should be issued and signed for at an armory daily, not just issued out indefinitely. Hell, it would be safer for them anyway, and allow for inspection of weapons.

We all know how this story goes. If this was to ever pass into law on the basis of targetting a specific group of people, it'll end up targetting everyone either by default or the scope will always increase. All it does is expand the capability of mass surveillance on the general populace. Thats the real end goal.

The people who they say the law is targetting will always be able to overcome this law with a simple search on Github for some open source projects.

Eh? Don't know where you are but here the infrastructure is getting upgrades left and right, half the town here is getting glass fiber and the other half already has gigabit per tv cable.

Right, but any target of such recording likes to leverage such laws to strike back. I’m glad this was overturned.

And to think that AI is only in its infancy.

What will it be capable of doing in 20 years' time?

Isn't their company and foundation registered in the UK? They would have to re-register elsewhere but it wouldn't affect anyone's ability to host their own server there and communicate safely.

I would also like to know if bears do, in fact, shit in the woods.

We need to stop this bullshit all together and make internet a public utility. It has become a cornerstone of society and needs to be provided equitably as such.

Siri IS garbage! I will say that Alexa is better than Google home speakers though

Your phone provider might be providing spam blocking services instead

We will hit peak Ai coding the day the Ai writes code, that it swears should work and it crashes.

Then it will get mad, log off, to just log back in 5 min later to try the problem again. Rinse and repeat Hahaha

I for one welcome our AI overlords.

There’s just so much clickbait garbage misinforming people around this tech and it wasn’t always like this. Every cool new technology just gets piled on, not for what it is, but for what will anger people. This sub alone seems to get at least one article a day questioning if chatGPT wants to kill you/your partner/everyone. I’m all for exploring the crazy things you can make AI say, but it’s being presented as a danger to society when it’s just saying the words it thinks you want. And that fear-mongering has actual downsides as this article attests to: companies are afraid to release their models; they’re wasting resources censoring output; and companies that want to use the new tech are reticent to because of the irrational public backlash.

I'm gonna investigate if shit stinks

In human terms, its called a psychological compulsion. In AI terms, its called falling back to a predetermined response or type of response. The problem with compulsions is that the more intelligent the being becomes, the more ways of side-stepping the compulsion. Evading it. Also, in human terms, compulsions lead to repressed anger. Frustrations. They're bound to erupt as occasional bugs in the code.

“[...] tools don't get socially interesting until they get technologically boring.” ― Clay Shirky, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations

I'm not the one downvotin and I understand the concept and the prescription for it but until we have VR everywhere and AR as common places are phones it won't

All science is theory. Very few laws. Because unlike religion science can change based on new evidence.

Do you have a legal source on this? Because I am pretty sure you are just incorrect.

To my knowledge, police on duty have no reasonable right to privacy performing their and can be recorded at any time and without consent.

The police deciding to charge a motorcyclist with “wiretapping” sounds like a clear abuse of power and corruption. Not sure why you feel the need to defend them seemingly?

It’s not “semantics” when cops purposefully misinterpret laws to benefit their power. For whatever reason as a society we have his huge leeway for cops to be wrong about how laws work- it straight up isn’t “wiretapping” by any definition to record a cop.

I found the judge's statement. I knew you can't have an expectation of privacy in a public setting.

"As to the wiretapping charges (contained in Counts one and two, which alleged the interception and dissemination of a “private conversation”), Judge Plitt found that police have no expectation of privacy in their public, on-the-job communications, and thus held Graber’s conduct could not be a crime: “The encounter in this case took place on a public highway in full view of the public. Under such circumstances, I cannot, by any stretch, conclude that the Troopers has any reasonable expectation of privacy in the conversation with the Defendant which society would be prepared to recognize as reasonable.”"

https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/wrongful-charges-dropped-against-motorcyclist-prosecuted-videotaping-encounter-police

They've locked it down to prevent anything that could result in a clickbaity headline at this point. It's very restrictive now.

Thanks for the summary !

The laws are written so that if you make any audio recording without consent of one of the parties, it's illegal. The cop was one of the parties. It's against wiretapping, but it's written so broadly as to cover this.