I, like the author, stopped worrying leaving aside unfinished projects. I cobsider learning or having fun was the project, and that I did finish. And I frequently come back to projects a while after.

But freezing is a local state, that shouldn't need more than auditing ? The control loop "freezed -> unfreeze" should maybe not be exposed for action if it has such consequences.

ofc it's /s, spoiling millions € of food by hacking into fridges of course il illegal. My guess is rendering the braindead auth / bug exploit illegal wouldn't change anything (besides legitimate uses)

You can train on questions, but I will rarely answer to a chat with a SO-quality answer.

I currently have ~12 windows open (Win11 explorer, office, dev / terminal apps, sublime, Firefox, signal) : almost every one of them has a different top bar.

"easy not complex" I'm not completely convinced by this point : it's hard to stay simple ! Maybe I'm just nitpicking between simple vs easy, but words especially in such a context (language and specs expression) are important !

OK but even if F1 teams are a very expensive arms race it doesn't prevent me to bike to shop cheaply. You eed to have a moat around what people need.

That's true for sure in most business endeavors. The goal is to fill the area under the demand curve and there are demands for F1 race cars and for scooters. The analogy breaks down somewhat with software in general and for sure with superintelligence. A superintelligence can provide those "low-level" (ie scooter) services perhaps just as effectively because it's super intelligent and knows how to do things efficiently - for example by spawning agents of different intelligence levels. It can thus fill the area under the demand curve. This is what the big AI firms are shooting for.

Some Pascal influences ?

Ultra basic diy solution (with no wireless, and less space that a nomad) but cheap and you can change the sound. https://hackaday.io/project/197279-game-of-the-2313-talking-...

You need both, and both are responsible for the current state.

To stop this, you need to try to stop both until one doesn't exists.

Lobbying is fine, though. Lobbying isn't bribery, although sometimes it probably looks like it. Lobbying is also an industry saying "please don't kill us; here's why that thing will kill us". The people making the decisions have the power (hence lobbyists need to exist) and they need to be better.

The revolving door between politician to made man (lobbyist) seems like a bit of a problem, no? These poor ex-politicians/staffers need to earn those mil+ salaries or they couldn’t effectively save these poor industries from demise? Perhaps the politician being asked to go easy on the regulations is potentially influenced by the ex-politicians rather lucrative position?

Corruption does not need to be overt to be destructive. It’s absolutely pervasive.

I will treat this comment charitably and just say that it's yet another case of "definition of X sounds good, so X can't be bad". I believe in reality it's less about "please don't kill us" and more about getting officials to set up the "pleas profit us" situation. Yes, money don't change hands in an office, so it's TECHNICALLY not a bribery.

Well, unlike regulators, companies die without profit. So they do indeed need profit. Smaller companies might want a system currently tilted against them to be changed. Larger companies might spend a fortune on regulation-following that has harmful outcomes, e.g. raising prices, for no benefit. Both of those motivations sound reasonable, and both getting their way may result in more profit for them. There's nothing wrong with profit.

The only thing that can possibly be bad is the regulation-writer, or the regulation enforcer, behaving incompetently and/or corruptly, who decides or enforces bad rules.