orc00

I agree.

As someone who spends their own time developing open-educational resources (OER), I was extremely limited in what I could do pre-AI. Now, AI has supercharged my ability to elevate my work in ways I could have never done before, particularly in visualizations, interactive widgets, and even images (often SVG for me), all of which are necessary components to the resources I've been developing online since 2020 (COVID-era).

Given that my programming abilities are very limited as well as my time, AI has allowed me to develop the missing pieces to much of what I was creating. When used properly (as an expert in a field using AI as a tool), the end product can be completely transformed and elevated in ways that could never have been. I am so thankful that AI came along just at the right time for me to do the things I could have never accomplished before.

Charles Petzold's The Lost Art of Logarithms is a great read (still a work in progress).

https://www.lostartoflogarithms.com/

the One country that dropped an A-bomb

"only country to use the bomb"

I was confused. Two very different statements but I assume they refer to the US who dropped two A-bombs (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) in anger.

I was looking for this and finally found it in the comments.

Derek Smart [1] is the indie developer behind the ambitious (and buggy) space sim Battlecruiser 3000AD [2]. He is known for his legendary Usenet presence in the 90s, and engaged in massive, aggressive flamewars with anyone who criticized his game or physics engine. He adopted the "combative game dev" archetype long before social media existed.

Now that he has been mentioned, there's a small chance he will drop by.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Smart

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlecruiser_3000AD

BobbyBroccoli on YouTube does an absolutely phenomenal job creating documentaries. Related to the dot-com burst would be the story he tells about Nortel.

- Part 1: https://youtu.be/I6xwMIUPHss?si=WXwM92NA8V6vdjYl

- Part 2: https://youtu.be/sDdC3-LT7pM?si=aiIDCjHJ0syeZZP4

If you go by the actual years of the legal system to treat your kid as an independent individual, you probably have wrong approach to parenting.

Oh I agree 100%. It's a pragmatic view, not the best one. But the laws are what they are for a reason.

I would argue that there is a duty as a parent to monitor a child's welfare and that would include accessing a smartphone when deemed necessary. When a child turns 18, that duty becomes optional. In this case, these disturbing conversations certainly merit attention. I am not judging the totality of the parents history or their additional actions. I am merely focusing on the phone monitoring aspect. Seventeen doesn't automatically grant you rights that sixteen didn't have. However, at 18, they have the right to find a new place to live and support themselves as they see fit.

This also sounds dystopian. At 17 you shouldn't "seek to obtain compliance" from your child. It sounds disrespectful and humiliating, not treating your child as an individual.

It is situation dependent. Sometimes immediate compliance is a necessity and the rest of it can be sorted out later. If a child is having conversations about killing their parents, there seems to be an absence of respect already. Compliance, however, can still be obtained.

Taking away a phone from a child is far from meaningless. In fact, it is a very effective way of obtaining compliance if done correctly. I am curious about your perspective.

Furthermore, it is my opinion that a child should not have a smartphone to begin with. It fulfills no critical need to the welfare of the child.