There are other means to help this exact issue than just increasing supply.

They could instead re-introduce the government programs (ECO) to insulate homes better - which is just ending - to reduce demand. Pumping heat into a home that has a draft going through it is still just burning money.

Increasing supply instead just fuels speeding up global warming which is contributing to higher energy usage due to requiring more heating/cooling. The same people will be equally affected by those issues, and that's before even talking about the environmental impact and risks of the actual drilling.

It's amazing how refried beans manages to walk the line of looking like liquid diarrhea whilst still being jealous for them.

It looks awesome, good use of wood scraps too!

Yes, and that sentiment captures exactly 2 sentences of a many paragraph email. It happens to be the part that can be interpreted most like drama from it, hence its a sensationalist title.

I agree with you, and also consider the current AI setup destructive and unethical all the way from the model creation from mostly stolen data to the data centers to run it with the issue you listed.

I would also prefer if more people spoke up on that to fasten the demise of this current hype.

That being said I also realise that Linux (and therefore the kernel) is incredibly important in a different fight for privacy and owning our own devices. If it were to fall behind because they completely lock themselves off from the admittedly useful aspects of AI, it could backfire in a different way.

I think it's a lose-lose situation here and he understandably picked the side that's more impactful for the Linux kernel (and him).

The actual body of his message seems to be more about him taking a stance that AI is a tool and people working on the project are free to choose to use it because it does have technical merit, which he considers the deciding factor in the case of the Linux kernel.

It's actually a pretty calm and reasonable message, I don't think the sensationalist title is warranted.

Yes - as long as it's served quickly after ordering.

I think the distinction you're looking for is between fast food and junk food.

I think on the face of it this sounds kinda reasonable, 174k is still a pretty comfy salary. I can see the person in charge of 100+ schools earning more than the one in charge of 1-2 though, but I'd much rather the money is spent on the teachers/kids as well.

I have the setup, never found a use for it though.

This may provide the first actual usecase for SUVs in cities. They seem to be about as tall as a child, so presumably invisible for the suv drivers.

Hopefully the robots will get mowed down when trying to cross the street.

Not to agree with him but.. They already are and have been for a while?

It is a good point about the bullying never stopping, but there are other ways to look at it as well. For example, online communities can be the escape for kids and a way for them to find support and friends if for some reason they are unable to in person. Sure the bill says they're aiming not to block chat, but it's not always a clear cut (e.g. discord, also not universally good or bad either).

I also wonder if removing the social media and the online bullying aspect will simply increase the ferocity of the in-person aspect, or even the overall depth as bullies may assign blame to their victims for them losing access to services.

I agree with the rest of your points, unfortunately it's evident the goal is not to protect kids but to remove anonymity and cater to the oligarchy - otherwise the government would be pushing social media sites to moderate themselves and service providers to give parents tools for this (or age verification in a manner that doesn't expose your identity outside of your device aside from the age group flag)

Thank you for the perspective.

I'm surprised parents think this is helping the issue though. I remember being bullied in school and going home after being beaten by other kids, before the time the internet became broadly available or smartphones existing.

Not that I don't think bullying is a problem, rather that this is duct tape with a side of privacy violation for everyone with barely a thought about how to even do the age verification well.

We are not seeing anything about funding the educational system, trying to attract more teachers, aiming for smaller class sizes, funding activities and clubs or more support for parents to spend time with their kids.