tl;dr - it's content creation rather than process and understanding

That decision was expanding rights, not removing them.

> That decision was expanding rights, not removing them.

Theft of personal property under US$10,000 is no longer a crime.

Survival of the fittest, as nature intended.

Expanded rights, therefore good.

Expanded rights for some at the direct expense of others. That's not the same as simply expanding rights, unless you count other people being 'offended' in the same category as someone being physically assaulted or killed.

> That's not the same as simply expanding rights, unless you count other people being 'offended' in the same category as someone being physically assaulted or killed.

Yes, they are the same category.

In US$10,000 property damage, nobody is physically harmed.

Here’s another example, expanded rights:

Anyone holding a 401k, IRA, or pension can purchase single family homes and apartments inside the account, and pay zero capital gains tax and zero rental income tax.

We expanded rights!

Take a guess what this does to the homeless population.

> Anyone holding a 401k, IRA, or pension can purchase single family homes and apartments inside the account, and pay zero capital gains tax and zero rental income tax.

I am not sure on pensions, but this is not true for a 401k. Only an IRA can be used without paying capital gains taxes for a home purchase. Including first time home buyers. Speaking from experience, I learned the hard way the benefit you are describing applies only to an IRA.

To be clear, you are saying that theft of <10k is not a crime..? If you steal an iPad in an airport, you are charged with theft. I don't know where you got that idea. People are charged with theft for much less than 10k daily.

How is damage to a property not physical?

I asked if it was always bad. It seems you agree that it is not always bad.

>Ditto for refusing to honor the 2nd amendment.

Honoring it, no doubt, by restricting firearms to duly registered militia personnel as written in the plain text for all to see? What about the 14th Amendment section 3, also written plainly?

The prefatory clause of the 2nd amendment’s usage of “well-regulated” means “well-equipped” (i.e., they should have lots of guns!).

It’s been repeatedly established through multiple SCOTUS interpretations that it’s just one example of why such rights shall not be infringed.

Yes. Feels like the better you are at your craft the better the tools work.

AI is a power tool/factory with no safety features. Expertise is required to get anything useful from them.

Yep, much like having access to a circular saw won't make me a carpenter, having access to an LLM won't make the average person a software engineer.

you're moving the goal post as language models and agents aren't marketed as something like circular saw but a team of carpenters that you just tell what you want and they do it for you.

I never claimed to agree with the marketing.

I like judgement. Taste is a subset.

For me taste is judgement about things that don't matter. Like you have taste in clothes. But a judge doesn't have bad taste when he makes a wrong decision, he has bad judgement.

In the old days porn peddlers were the pioneers of digital.

Sure but porn is a separate category. It's not really a scam.

"my phone died yesterday, a friend just gave me his old pixel" - please don't do this. That's lying to law enforcement and they can prosecute. Just say it's your travel phone.

If the government could easily get the remote backup they would have already done it.

iirc, a harness isn't allowed, but if the LLM wants to write its own tools to solve things that is allowed.

Are you testing a model or a harness? People conflate the two.

Can't you do that with regular Unix permissions?