Who, the government Reddit

They were relying on users to click I am definitely over 18. So there is by definition no possible way to know if children's data was being misused except to the extent it obviously was.

Age verification should have been a device side thing. I should be able to set up my kids phone / tablet with their date of birth and if they're not old enough then they can't access certain content. That way the only person who needs to verify the age of someone is me.

My ISP shipped with age restriction on by default, (personally I think that's a stupid default but that's a separate issue), but although annoying it was easy to get rid of because I'm the account holder. I didn't have to scan my ID though.

Anyway we all know this has been nothing to do with kids anyway.

Once the right have managed to get this law passed, they'll go back to not caring about the kids again. It's infuriating now often they get away with this scam.

I was a kid back when most adults thought that computers what operated by tiny pixies and computer mice had three buttons. We had a content filter on the school computers that could be circumvented by not typing www. at the beginning of a URL. I could have seen all sorts of inappropriate content if I had wanted, but I didn't because I was 12 so I just used it to play RuneScape. The kids are alright, it's the adults that are all messed up.

Yes but also these people, especially the likes of Donald Trump, don't really understand how the world works so all their plans for controlling it never come off, because things that would be blindingly obvious to most people, are utterly obtrused to them.

You know like the idea that people would just not use privacy invading applications. How many people do you think have actually submitted their IDs versus have just downloaded a VPN or convented their controls in other ways? Then they'll make VPNs illegal and think that they've in some way achieved something, but they will always be a workaround for their authority, because the people they are trying to control are smarter than them.

Tech CEOs don't live in the same world as the rest of us. Maybe when the AI bubble pops they'll finally realise that it might be good idea to have some actual humans working in the company C suite. Rather than repeatedly hiring from the same pod person pool of recycled MBA executives.

Is that some new hip social media app that I am not gen alpha enough to understand. I've only managed to get as far as Fortnite.

To me it doesn't matter if you use biological learning or the method described below

What would biological learning for an AI look like? I don't even know what this sentence means or what you're trying to convey.

both can self adjust

No they can't. That's the whole point, they self-adjust they have no free will so they have no ability to take self-modification actions.

they can go off and self browse the web or use camera vision etc

Yes, but so can a non-intelligent computer program. The ability to access the internet has nothing to do with intelligence. See humans.

The old research you talk about science felt hit a wall decades ago, but later (now) they realized we just didn't feed it enough info.

I think this is where you're getting confused. The "old research", aka neural networks didn't hit a wall, it's just it was never particularly useful outside of very niche circumstances. But it's been used extensively in OCR for decades. But it is not intelligence anymore than a plant turning towards the sun is intelligence. It's just evolutionarily enforced stimulation response. Large language models work on a completely different concept, you don't get good results by feeding neural networks lots of input because it just overwhelms them with signal and they can't optimise towards anything. If you built a neural network with a 100 trillion nodes you might actually get something useful, but it still wouldn't be artificial intelligence and no one's doing that anyway because it's prohibitively processor intensive and anyway LLMs exist.

But if you look up any recent papers on what science is doing in this field you'll see what I mean, even what appears to be emergent behaviours, which may just be a result of neural learning methods whether human or silicon based.

It's important to realise that words mean the things they mean. Emergent behaviour just means that they behaviour is emergent, it doesn't mean that the behaviour is intentional or directed. Large crowds have emerged behaviour, it doesn't mean that there's some hive mind control everyone.

The percentage of the global population made up by white people has declined from 40% to 7% in like 50years.

Well yeah if you just gonna make quotes up I guess anything is true.

Someone needs to teach this intellectual juggernaut about the use of the comma.

For it to be a kill switch it would have to actually terminate a rogue AI.

I mean not necessarily. Human consciousness arrived without a higher intelligence needing to understand our complexity.

Who is to say that there is only one path to intelligence? What it would say though is that since LLM's do not self-modify they by definition cannot be the path to AGI

Fortunately you can save money by not buying HP PCs.

If run prices get out of hand don't buy more RAM don't upgrade your computer don't give them your money and then when the bubble pops continue not to give them your money. All these manufacturers need to fail