In that case they would be locking down their subsidiary even further to just one client. I guess it all comes down to the plausibility of their argument for making this investment, rather than, say increasing dividends or ploughing that money back into other investments for the business. I guess they were able to justify the OpenAI investment along these lines. If I could hazard a guess, it would be something along the lines of:

This is a new market. We need to get in at the ground floor.

I suspect, OpenAI presented itself as a turn key solution to get a foothold in this brave new world and maybe steal a march on Google.

But Microsoft does. And those shareholders would want to know why money that could be going to them is frittered away on a startup that is constitutionally set up to leave money on the table.

Doesn’t that go against Microsoft’s fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders to maximize profits? At the very least, it would be contentious among the shareholders. Leaving money on the table? This is the kind of thing would need a very brave (or cavalier) CEO to risk a personal lawsuit.

The problem is it doesn’t solve the core issue. What’s to stop an AI data center buying up all the startup’s stock and future stock also.

While I don’t posit that China is uniquely awful here are some low lights:

• The oppression of the Uyghur Muslims
• The invasion of Tibet
• The threatened annexation of Taiwan
• The Tiananmen Square massacre. Shall I go on?

I wonder if there is any inherent defence against slop on Lemmy. I guess if an instance doesn’t prune it’s user base of bots, shills and other slop merchants, it could be black listed by other admins of other instances.

This recent rise may also be due to the current US administration forgetting to stockpile petroleum before going to war.

Even if this is true, and I make no comment on that, you may very well be correct. Without further laws/treaties bidding ≠ selecting. I assume one of the criteria is the company’s fitness.

The train operators should recognise that they are in a bit of a monopsony, here.

Looking at the requested penalty makes me wonder why they didn’t request one trillion. I mean if you are being blatant about your ulterior motive to scare off further investigation into your unethical practices.

Anyway they now got the stink on them. Any railway operator dealing with them will have no one but themselves to blame going forward.

Compared to what? I mechanical drive left on the shelf tends to seize up over time. Flash storage looses it’s trapped electrons representing bits. To protect the more sensitive data from bit rot, I use par2 for the files and dvdisaster for the whole disc.

I use BD to archive personal data. Then send it off site. The data is encrypted, so it can only be accessed with the correct authentication. What’s wrong with that?

Not so sure that it can’t be tailored to big businesses. Regulations carve out exceptions all the time based on employee count, annual turnover, customer count (hits), etc

Not gonna lie, this is kinda a refutation of the whole open source model. I was led to believe that it shouldn’t matter who writes the code, as long the code is able to be interrogated/corrected.

If this is any guide, maybe there should also be an upper age limit, too.

Well the devil is in the detail. However, what appears is being mooted is it will only affect big social media corporations. A Lemmy instance is hardly big business. Not that I’m discounting creeping regulation moving into the fediverse.

I was told that it was convention to use the highest government title that a person received once they leave government. Personally, I don’t think that explanation holds much water. We don’t really hear, for example of President Obama any more. Nor do we hear Secretary of State Clinton. On a practical matter, it can cause confusion so outside propaganda, I don’t see much utility in it.

It’s a storage agnostic protocol for sending, receiving and enumerating to/from cloud storage. Think off it like email. Email service providers allow for a number of ways to access your email, be it pop3, IMAP or web. The underlying technology is abstracted away. In the same way cloud storage allows for web, s3 and/or WebDAV. Amongst others. And likewise the back end is abstracted away. The s3 client you use doesn’t need to know how the data is actually stored. And there’s some pretty whacky storage back ends.

At this point he’s just pushing potential users away. I wonder if he’s given up on it and is just holding on to it until the election is completed.

I wonder if some kind of mesh might work. Maybe like a secret Santa type deal. By that I mean everyone who connects, gets a randomised, anonymous partner or partners. Everyone in the swarm streams for each other.

I think the trade is, you take on the purchase of the house, and the landlord takes on all the downside risk.