Assuming full technical responsibility would probably make most AI-generated code pointless, as the whole point of using AI this way is that generating code saves work. Which is not any more the case if the result is really fully reviewed.

When you submit code that you write you take responsibility for it, irregardless of the tools you use. AI generated code should not be different in this aspect.
You can use AI to generate code but you should review it anyway, at least at the basic level to make sure that it does not contain obvious bugs and do what it is supposed to do.

The other thing is there is no way one can declare AI generated code safely free of copyright isses. You’d need to prove that the result code was not contained in the training data - which is not possible.

Which itself should make people to avoid to use AI generated code for anything else than playing around.

When companies are not able to produce enough to satisfy demand and are actively stopping selling to certain sectors and harming them, they should lose their patents.

Except they stop selling to certain sectors because these sectors pay less. I am pretty sure that if a laptop maker ask to buy the RAM at a 50% higher price than AI companies, the RAM producer will happily sell to them.

RAM companies are actively harming all of us by selling their products to the AI companies and leaving us all without RAM, so we should encourage alternatives.

And how do you plan to keep these alternatives from selling to the higher bidder, which will probably be a AI company ?

It depends. If they accept to join as any other country (so, Euro, Schengen and so on) why not ? They are just another country. If they still want a special status, they can stay out, nobody miss them.

Maybe, but I think that they will not upgrade the system, even without this change there is no reason to use a 7.x kernel on a 30+ Yeats old hardware

On an unrelated news, Microsoft warns that water is wet.

That hotel Wi-Fi networks are not the most secure networks is nothing new to be honest…

Ok, but then it is perfectly fair also for a phone.

The US government knows this.

The US government should also know who hold its debt…

Yep, I would love to see how will go if the commander in chief of the world largest army invade one country of one of the largest ower of their public debt…

EU will not even need to send an army, we just need to sell the US debt.

If Britain was opposing the EU and they allowed Britain to leave then they must feel safe about the future of the EU.

UK was not opposing EU, they were simply watering down everything.
But even US could not really interfere with UK internal politics to such level. They tried to convince people that were better to stay in the EU but Farage (and in my opinion EU) won.

If requested by who?

IIRC by the seller, if you did not pay the montly check for your loan they were able to disable the car and then recollect it

That would actually be a fantastic security feature for owners to be able to do if their car is stolen.

Yep, it was a fantastic security feature for the owners but also a way to disable the car if you do not pay the loan.

In some way yes

Did they forget to bribe UEFA officials?

Reading the article, it seems he forget to bribe everyone, not only UEFA officials…

Well no. At some point it will become too much expensive to extract them to be able to continue to use them.

Not considering that sooner or later someone will realize that it would be less expensive, in the long run, to devolop a serious alternative to the oil (be sun, wind, nuclear or whatever else) than be subject to the blackmail of a single state and/or person which would decide that it is a great idea to start a war just because. And this, as a byproduct, will also resolve most of the problems in the middle east region since without oil they had nothing.

Do you know which reforms?

Every reform that increased the integration of EU made after Brexit, basically. Historically UK blocked a lot of reforms because the cannot profit from them. Remember that UK had a special status in the EU, from the beginning, so it was their interest to block reforms that would have forced them to give in some of their advantages. Think about a common European defense, UK always stopped it because they were told so by the US.

Why do you like it, apart from overcoming blocks?

First of all, because it is the only logical conclusion if we want to keep Europe somewhat relevant in the world.
After that, though I’m speaking as an Italian here, maybe politicians will be forced to do more than just try to act like they own their little backyard and probably we will gain something.

I think to remember to have read something about the possibility for a car manufacturer to remotely disable the car if requested or defaulted, something like once you park the car and turn off the engine it will not start again so no security problem, but I cannot pinpoing when/where i read it or if it ever went beyond the stage of an idea.

Here we are talking about things not completely paid off. If you use a loan to buy something (a car, a phone, a house, whatever) until you paid off all the loan the thing is not yours.

If you don’t pay your car loan, they can reposses it, if you don’t pay your phone loan they block it, if you don’t pay your data plan they close it. I don’t see anything strange here.

But i’m not against the ban myself. We use animals mostly for two reasons: their body as an object (meat, leather, milk, etc), and their energy as a tool. In developed nations we replaced their physical effort with machines, what remains in is basically entertainment.

True, but in this case it was/is a tipical tourist attraction. I don’t see why we could not still offer it without mistreating the horses. Btw, then also the other places that offer rides with horses should be banned.

Everyone with a pet will say their cat/dog is not merely entertainment, I know I’m being a bit crude here but animals aren’t really needed anymore in that sense. Dogs form a bigger exception than horses nowadays.

You are not entirely right. For people who live in the city it is true, for people who live in the countryside animals, mostly dogs but not only them, are still working animals for a lot of things.

Personally i think those horses could feel fine entertaining tourist by riding them around in carriages - if they’d treat the animal well.

That’s the whole point. They could have enforced the rules (or make better ones if necessary) instead of banning something (which will probably end with the horses killed and sold as food).

But nowadays my impression is that all this “love” for the animals is used to hide the fact we do nothing for the people.

Which would be the correct solution. Short term rent are only the wrong answer to a real problem (the fact that a bad tenants has more right of the homeower in the end).

But I will love to see what the EU will say when they will discover that the vast majority of the homes on the short rental market will not enter the long rent market.

So the solution would be a better enforcing of the rules, not to ban something that is somewhat tipical but it seems that nowadays we prefer to ban something instead of enforce the already present rules.

When talking to a tyranny or an authoritarian regime, you are referring to its ‘leader.’ So, basically, you are asking pootin to hand himself over. Which is absurd.

Historically dictators never step down voluntarily…

Which is something they already can do, just push an update and they are done. And after they simply go out of the market: nobody will buy their phone anymore.

But this is something different, here we are talking about something that is not different than reposessing a car if you don’t pay the loan you used to buy it.