coremoff

I don't think I'm qualified to provide an answer - trying to detail how execs should not be able to profit from fail-cases like this is a mine-field of edge cases, I expect.

I do think that you shouldn't be doing anything to destroy their lives "no pension" (outside of any judicial outcomes); but it should be sufficiently comprehensive such that you can declare both that no one profited from malfeasance/incompetance and that poeple in positions governed by these provisions are strongly encouraged to make sure that they don't fall foul of them.

I agree with what you're saying, however I think talking in absolutes is counter-productive:

> No golden parachutes, no deferred bonuses, no pensions

In my opinion, hard cutoffs like this create perverse incentives, but there definitely need to be consequences for actions.

The tradeoff suggested above (not saying that it's the right way around or correct) is:

* If you provide ChatGPT then 5 people who would have died will live and 1 person who would have lived will die. ("go to the doctor" vs "don't tell anyone that you're suicidal")

* If you don't provide ChatGPT then 1 person who would have died will live and 5 people who would have lived will die.

Like many things, it's a tradeoff and the tradeoffs might not be obvious up front.

It's the trolley problem reframed; not sure we have a definitive answer to that.

that sounds like something that would be worthwhile presenting to a wider audience

GP's reply was written to emulate the sort of response that ChatGPT has been giving recently; an obsequious fluffer.

FYI that page linked does not work in firefox

Sonos were originally great, when they were a platform to injest your music and stream to your various rooms.

That was years ago, and now they want to own the whole thing, from music to speakers, and are willing to brick old devices to force you onto more isolating versions of their app.

I'm very glad I never switched to them (was close when Logitech killed squeezebox), and would not recommend them to anyone for any reason.

Something needs to be done; Google's mission is at odds to good browser development, and having an effective monopoly with the world using a single browser is not good for users even without the advertising conflict of interest.

A timely message, particularly given the apparent sabotage of undersea cables and other hubrid warfare we've been seeing recently.

I hope this also helps with morale in Ukraine.

it's a bit more involved than that, IIRC (been a while) - the civilisations involved typically migrate around the galaxy, entierly abandoning entire arms of the milky way and moving to another; agreements with other non-compatible civilisations mean that those that remain exist in an extremely hostile environment (the wars between the oxygen and hydrogen breathers, in particular, were notable until they managed to come to this arrangement).

There are also significant numbers of extremely agressive and militaristic civilisations, mostly held back by the laws and customs of setting, who would gleefully seek out and destroy anyone not following along.

I have a wobble board at my standing desk; keeps me moving constantly without distracting me.

I've posted in the sibling thread r.e. the density (which I believe you have underestimated by several orders of magnitude), however a stroll around london will show you that, excepting arterial roads, cars always have to deal with pedestrians crossing at any time and place, including between you and the car ahead if you come to a stop, or if there's more than a couple meters between you and the next car. Even busy arterial roads will have to deal with people walking across them if there are large gaps or the traffic is slow or stalled.