> by just telling LLMs to make an app or to make money or something.

Again, that is literally OpenAI's business model: burn money building ChatGPT until it's smart enough to tell them how to be profitable.

"That's a bold strategy, Cotton, let's see if it pays off for 'em."

The general consensus on HN appears to be that that's because Americans are just shitty.

I heard somewhere that OpenAI's business model is literally to burn investorbux evolving ChatGPT until it becomes sentient, and then ask it how to make a profit. That's how on the crazy train the whole AI endeavor is. Of course someone's going to point at this comment and go "Ha-ha!" in the 2030s when it turns out that somehow it worked.

Matt Levine put it really well: "We will create God and then ask it for money."

AI has really sharpened the line between the Master Builders of the world and the Lord Businesses along this question: What, exactly, is the "fun part" of programming? Is it simply having something that works? Or is it the process of going from not having it to having it through your own efforts and the sum total of decisions you made along the way?

Also AI.

Ooooh, that's fun to make topple. I kind of want to launch an Angry Bird at it.

Whenever Steam's web site asked me for my date of birth before allowing me to view a game trailer, I would punch in January 1, over 10 years after my actual date of birth (still well within grown-ass man territory because I'm geriatric in gamer years). Because they don't fucking need to know exactly when I was born. Only that I'm old enough.

Absent the Satanists who run California and the nation conducting a dark ritual to summon Steve Jobs back from the abyss, the chances of him saving Apple from total enshittification collapse again the way he did the first time are slim to none. It's peak Apple fan to grouse about how rotten everything is in the Fruit Empire, and then conclude "Welp, nothing to be done for it except smoke hopium that Apple somehow gets better."

Hint: This is what happens when you commit to joining any single company's ecosystem. No matter if it's Apple, Microsoft, Google, Commodore, or frickin' IBM. At some point, the beancounters are going to smother what drew you to them in the first place, and find ways to nickel-and-dime you whilst flipping the table on you UX-wise hoping to tap some rich vein of unconverted users to continue the illusion of quarterly growth.

I would so love to contradict you, but I can’t. I have to completely agree.

What it generally means is that the lower court ruling stands and serves as precedent nationwide. Binding precedent in the circuit that handed down the ruling. But another circuit may make a different ruling sometime, and then the Supremes practically have to hear the case to resolve the conflict.

True, but SCOTUS is not required to grant Cert even if a circuit split develops. They may feel the issue needs more time to "mature".

e.g. They may want more cases heard in the lower courts to provide them with a better 'flavor' regarding the nature of legal arguments being made; or more time for a rapidly changing business/social development to evolve and greater clarity emerges.