Are you saying the FAA has a permanent and up to date list of ICE operations? Because if so, that's a public list and something that some might be very interested in for knowing when and where ICE is operating.

And if they don't, there is no basis for enforcement, so we're done.

It's just an extra chilling effect. Or yet another reason to shoot you and your terrist drone.

Sounds like you're literally the target audience for this app.

Not if there is a hard positive correlation between productivity and slouching, like they say.

Title should read "Microsoft confirms it will give the FBI your Windows PC data encryption key if court-ordered to do so".

Just because the article is click bait doesn't mean the HN entry needs to be, too.

Sure, the fact that MS has your keys at all is no less problematic for it, but the article clearly explains that MS will do this if legally ordered to do so. Not "when the FBI asks for it".

Which is how things work: when the courts order you to do something, you either do that thing, or you are yourself violating the law.

What's that? Windows, due to its market position, should not be allowed to force users into online-only accounts? Agreed.

Gonna venture a guess and say probably https://www.chromium.org/developers, as that's where all the information for folks who actually need to know that kind of thing lives.

There was no challenge. There was a statement, "AI can write code, but it can't affect the physical world."

Tell that to all the car accidents caused by people distracted by siri, the people who’ve done horrible things because of AI induced psychosis, or the lives ruined by ai stock trading algorithms.

I didn't write the statement, nor did I waste time and money on this "experiment" when the US needs time and money spent on very different actions right now.

They're not halluciations. Don't anthropomorphise this nonsene, call it what it is because this is not a new problem: this is garbage data, and that garbage data should have been caught. Having a submission pipeline that verifies sources even exist (not that they're citing the right thing) is one the bare minimum responsibilities of a paid journal.

This has almost nothing to do with AI, and everything to do with a journal not putting in the trivial effort (given how much it costs to get published by them) required to ensure subject integrity. Yeah AI is the new garbage generator, but this problem isn't new, citation verification's been part of review ever since citations became a thing.

As someone who was part of the "everyone should learn to code" movement, no, we didn't. We tried all kinds of stuff for a decade and none of it was actually any good, only the people who would have learned to make stuff anyway learned to make stuff. LLMs are radically different: despite their results being terrible, and only just starting to show that maybe that can be a little better than terrible with opus 4.5, they actually meet people who want to make something where they are: skilled folks can make highly complex things (with code quality that's just as good as before because they know how to take what the LLM gives them and make it better), and unskilled folks can make "that one thing they want to" (and the code quality if irrelevant because it's a one-off that's not going to be maintained).

Thought this would be about Vancouver, but unfortunately it was just about an AI company =(

But why are we still slapping on woefully tiny stock coolers that spin so fast your room sounds like an RC racing arena?