AndyMcConachie

The problem is one of information provenance. A search engine shows you stuff that other people have written. It might be right or it might be wrong. But you get to judge that yourself, because you have an idea of where the information came from.

With AI summaries they take that away from you and claim the provenance for themselves. Google is now giving you the answer and they hide where that answer came from. Therefore, you cannot properly evaluate the provenance of the information presented. It still might be right or wrong, but you can no longer properly evaluate it based on source.

Yes. Making meaning often requires context. The study of this is often referred to as pragmatics.

> They already do that, in Europe. I assume that it works, as I don’t hear about this level of stuff, over there

As an EU citizen and resident I strongly recommend you not take EU privacy controls seriously. The GDPR functions well as a means of tax collection, but it really doesn't work all that well as something that actually protects people's privacy.

Amazon regularly sends me spam emails.

As bad as this is, I don't see how it is fundamentally different to the ways in which research grants have been doled out before. Hasn't it always been somewhat political?

Granted, the methods used here are asinine. But I don't think USG research has ever been apolitical and there have always been special words that grant writers knew to use and not use. Part of being in research is getting grants and it has always been a silly game. This just seems to take the silly game to whole new levels.

No. You're simply wrong.

But how many times can you take a piece of Ikea furniture apart and put it back together again? I have friends who have moved apartments with the same Billy bookshelf 2-3 times and if they tried it one more time the thing would collapse.

Not to belabor the metaphor as heavily as my friend's Billy, but there's a maintenance corellary to be made here. Most Ikea furniture can be put together once, in one place, and left there for a long time. But once you want to change it in place it may just collapse.

Embrace, extend, destroy. This has always been MS. They basically haven't changed since 1990.

Why do people keep buying all this garbage and putting it in their homes?

>> The myth of DNS “propagation” needs to die.

> What's the actual issue? Are you being frustrated by people laboring under the assumption that DNS records are being sent by carrier pidgeon or something?

The actual issue is that some people misunderstand how DNS works, and the notion that records propagate doesn't help people understand it better. It propagates a misunderstanding of DNS.

I would expect online video games to be a more important driver.