We're going to be pulling AI shrapnel out of the weakly twitching carcass of the British state for decades aren't we?

My previous employer did regular internal surveys and one of the questions was always about whether you were paid enough

We were all overpaid compared to our value to society and because we weren't allowed to discuss pay in theory had no other point of reference

Always answered underpaid

And I just found and bought it. I admit, it was the Dredd link that tipped the scales.

I always presumed that a lot of the point of "tough on crime" politics was to emphasis that "real criminals" are someone else, not proper people

Not least as a way to excuse people of their own faults and errors which can be ignored as they know they aren't "real criminals"

A face swap app is a nudify app with a hat on. Well, more than a hat, but you see what I mean.

I think this comes in part from general luxury and wealth obsessed social media. It creates the foundations for the idea that the rich aren't paying their share.

That said it could be straightforward to require dynamic road-pricing for all self-driving cars. They need much more in in the way of continuous network connection. A good chunk of the tax would end up in the pockets of the cloud hyperscalers and the cars might need to be specially built for the UK

Navigation is basically coercing fairly rough location data according to a pre-computed road network. It doesn't have to be very precise for navigation but it would probably have significantly additional constraints (precision, updated on-board map, secure storage) if you used it for road pricing.

I have to admit AI has caused me to revise down my estimate of how clever humans are.

Unfortunately I missed the window for the free article, but amongst I would have wanted to check it covering was:
1) Will the savings be more than the cost of the AI?
2) Will it be proof against manipulation? More sophisticated versions of "ignore all previous instructions" tricks

The defense team presses Lairmore on whether the sandwich really 'exploded.' They return to the photo of the sandwich and wrapper on the ground.

"That sandwich hasn't exploded at all, has it?" defense asks.

"It looks like a little bit is coming out towards the bottom," Lairmore replies.

It can help, although might be difficult to distinguish between posts documenting something bad vs encouraging something bad.

I just worry that straight content rules are too likely to run into intentional or effective malicious compliance because in the end it's not at all an easy problem.

Users numbers don't scale cleanly with profitability. That's why so much effort goes into 'engagement'.

A system that focused on matching levels of moderation with levels of engagement might be useful (hence my preference for biz-model/ads focus) but video/images/memes would make AI less useful.

I can appreciate the logic of that, agree that they should exist, but I suspect that middling effort would look like almost no effort at all from the outside.

It's just insane numbers - over 5000 posts per second on X. Assume a 1 in 1000 troublesome post and you're looking at 450k a day

What matters for my vote under FPTP is the voting landscape locally and how that interacts with likely outcome of 649 other local votes.

Happy to see a coalition with Green Party in it wouldn't want to see them with a majority.

My choice in the next election is:

1) Vote for someone who loses
2) Vote for someone who I don't want to win

So my very trivial contribution in 2029 will be 1 with the
vague and almost certainly vain hope of providing the merest featherlike nudge to policy positions in the 2034 election.