The analogy is that you buy a car (because if it breaks, the car and your entertainment stuff, you will buy a new one to replace it, you will also carry all maintenance) but suddenly you can’t drive backwards anymore because the manufacturer decided retroactively that you should pay extra for that (possibly in a subscription).

I would say it is your good right then to make your car drive backwards regardless of what it may take.

You really don’t know the history of Microsoft, do you?

The interface gets a little better and that’s it basically? (Alternatively: They try to spin a social medium around it and fail somewhat and succeed somewhat?)

Which is exactly the problem people think has been solved but isn’t anywhere near being solved. It cannot comprehend semantics, the meaning of things is completely beyond it and all other AIs.

Unfortunately saying I made a thing that creates vaguely human looking speech with little content isn’t astonishing to most people hence they are looking for something useful this breakthrough machine must be able to do and then they don’t find anything leading to these articles.

Might be true for you but most people do have a concept of true and false and don’t just dream up stuff to say.

An algorithm suggesting things you might like doesn’t have to be AI. There are simple metrics to achieve that (e.g. things other people who liked this also liked)

Or are we calling every algorithm AI now?

The implied difference is if someone or even you know how the algorithm works, which for “new” is relatively straightforward.

This happend to me a lot 10-15 years ago but since then has never again happened to me. With the noteable exception of Arch Linux which does tell you to read update notes though.

Nothing has changed about why that is compelling: NAT sucks and creates nothing but problems.

Network security is almost the same with IPv6.

If you rely on NAT as a security measure you are just very bad at networking.

True but the difference is the ability to choose what you deem best. The government could simply run their own instances with their own rules (the german public television runs a mastodon instance for example) and supply information/services as they see fit.

It is irrelevant what other instance owners do or think about it because the instance owner is in control.

Why it is a bad idea to offer public services on a for profit platform: A case study

Why isn’t it just federating though? Do I have to create an account just to read the Twitter instance?