benced

I doubt the display is hardware locked. Apple is too good at protecting its margin to do that.

These are fridges in supermarkets, not home fridges. I think a supermarket capable of administering many fridges can put their big boy pants on and handle the potential downsides of controllability.

Yours is incorrect though :). Advertising brings tremendous consumer subsidies (most trivially: Google and Facebook are free). It would be convenient for your POV if there was no tradeoff though so I understand why you would prefer to pretend.

I'm not pro-Israel by any means but foreign adversary is a bit much.

Companies wasting their money is the company's problem and it's really unclear to me why the government should give a single damn.

If you could afford a computer at pre-AI prices (which is presumably what you're complaining about? If you couldn't afford a computer before, AI hasn't changed that for you), you have enough money to put where your mouth is.

You can short them and make a lot of money (to buy RAM with?) if you feel this way and are correct.

Luna is the main exception to this. It's such a cheap model and the tokens come so fast.

This will make the world much poorer. You might think that's worth it but it's true.

This is potentially stupider than the claimed crime.

All the model companies except kind of Anthropic (and even they half-assedly do) implement the OpenAI API. It's not an open standard but, like the S3 API, it effectively is.

And, to answer your question, no. The existence of a common API makes it trivial to change zero code and send requests to a different model.

This seems trivial: if you could add enough plants to your room to reduce CO2, we could easily do the same thing at planet-scale and global warming wouldn't be an issue.

The situation you're positing already basically exists with housing - who literally ask for proof of your income - and while housing goes up at unreasonable rates due to lack of construction, it clearly doesn't go up at the same rate (and _definitely_ not by the same raw amount) as income does.

I suspect part of the reason this is playing well on this website is banning surveillance pricing is great for rich people. I don't have the time or inclination to coupon or aggressively cross-shop but I benefit a lot from the less well-off folks who do. The grocery store, without any ability to differentiate, has to assume that I might be one of those people and sell me a banana at the same price.