In this case, a local on-prem backup in your office-that-is-not-an-aws-datacenter would've worked and satisfy the law right?

(or an AWS Outpost thingy, assuming those things work even if the mothership is down)

"We've been a naughty company and need to be punished."

"Daddy, where were you when the flames reached our house?"

"I was in the office, reviewing Terraform plans"

Well I guess this excuse is finally gonna become obsolete soon with all the "pacing" nonsense.

I think you should consider the gigawatts of heat generated to create the LLM model to make it a more fair comparison.

I might be alone in this, but 10% chance of humanity being wiped out in the next 10 years is a small price to pay if it means I can avoid writing YAML config by hand ever again.

Look, I love my kids and all, but c'mon... 30+ years more of YAML? I think they'll understand.

Honestly I think it’s an apt punishment for ever inventing YAML in the first place.

It only takes one to be a problem. This isn't a two-way street the same way that communication or collaboration is a two-way street. This is entirely one-way in that the corporate levels are putting down apps, services and hardware designed to undermine privacy. Customers don't have any choice in the matter except to look for alternative packages, but this will stop working eventually (and already has in some markets). The set of possible safe hobbies and experiences continues to shrink as more and more of it becomes impossible to find without weapons against privacy. The only way to stop this is regulation.

It's like Google without Ad/SEO incentives. All it took was trillions of dollars of investment.

I prefer calling it the "Simpsons defense" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZSoJDUD_bU

homer eating that pie was so good!

Bart & Lisa are OpenAI and Anthropic.

Homer is Meta/Microsoft/Google/AWS.

Marge is Nvidia.

Maggie is Apple.

> so does that mean we should be up and arms about the mamdani campaign?

No, we should be up and arms about TikTok.

And what else? Cable news? Talk radio? Printing press?

I get your point but its hard not to look past the fact that only 1 of the 4 mentioned mediums have real time, user-personalized, opaque algorithmic endless scrolling, and a disproportionately higher rate of addiction.

Uhh, until recently, didn't those three undergo exactly the same kind of scrutiny and have had the regulations we are talking about here put in place for them?

Of course, all that existing regulation is being undone, thanks in part to TikTok, Facebook, etc.

The only restriction currently[1] in place on newspapers in the United States is that you cannot write libel i.e you cannot knowingly falsely write something that hurts another’s reputation. This is the same restriction as in verbal speech where you cannot say slander which is like libel but spoken.

[1] There have been other restrictions placed at various times but these other restrictions have over time been found to be contrary to the First Amendment.

>Uhh, until recently, didn't those three undergo exactly the same kind of scrutiny and have had the regulations we are talking about here put in place for them?

Newspapers were never regulated, with "the press" being specifically mentioned in the first amendment. Talk radio and broadcast TV were only regulated because the airwaves were a shared resource and therefore subject to government regulation. Cable news was never subject to the fairness doctrine.