This. The ISP isn’t going to care about (or notice) a single person using a router. They will notice and care if 1 person is consuming the data of 20.

Fall in share price, yes.

Bankrupt, no. Their debt to Equity Ratio is 0.1455. They can pay off their $11.23 B debt with 2 months of revenue. They can certainly afford the interest payments.

Bot listening is probably fraud.

he botted his songs in order to earn royalties.

So if the listens were natural there would no case?

Yes. I’d also add that current copyright laws are archaic and counterproductive when combined with modern technology.

Creators need protection, but only for 15 years. Not death + 70 years.

nobody gets paid based on whether or not you fastforward

You know skip exists. Advertisers only pay when viewers watch at least 30 seconds of a long ad or engage with it.

Let’s go to the early days of “piracy”

You are claiming that fast forwarding the opening trailers and adverts on a rented VHS is piracy.

Scroll passed Bing’s sponsored bullshit

Ah. Still some ads then.

It’s parasitism if it’s for their own benefit only.

Now, if openAI actually opened their AI (weights and models, not just access) then maybe the argument would be stronger.

in ways that exceed the limits of free speech

I think this part is key. X is hiding behind US laws which Brazil and the EU have very little say in.

The brazil Judiciary want some profiles blocked. Is that what the EU should demand too?

Blocking profiles seems heavy handed, and best aimed at the individual, not the provider.

I think you have a point here. Venture capitalists buy in the primary market. They are directly impacting innovation.

Fund managers (both hedge and long only) merely help capital markets to be liquid. Their money doesn’t directly go to anyone actually creating something.

If a bunch of people photographed that same incident from different angles, clearly it’s real.

I don’t think you can assume this anymore.

Actually I think we are mostly agreeing.

The difference is that you think that the technology will quickly be made cheap and portable enough for mass consumption and I think it will remain, for quite some time, niche and expensive, like high end, precision industrial equipment.

You should get that fixed.

Why are you isolating a single algorithm?

To show that quantum computing only helps with very specific parts of very specific algorithms.

A QC is not a CPU, it’s not a GPU, it’s closer to a superpowered FPU.

If they would offer speed benefits, then why wouldn’t you want to have the chip that offers the speed benefits in your phone?

if somehow consumers could have access to technology in their phone that would offer performance benefits to their software that they wouldn’t want it.

Because the same functionality would be available as a cloud service (like AI now). This reduces costs and the need to carry liquid nitrogen around.

The issue is not that quantum computers could not offer performance benefits in theory.

It is this. QC only enhances some very specific tasks.

It is the same with GPUs. A GPU can only speed up certain problems. You have libraries that only call the GPU when it is needed for certain calculations.

Yes, exactly my point. QC is a less flexible GPU.

I don’t see why consumers wouldn’t want it.

Because they would need to use the specific quantum enhanced algorithms frequently enough to pay to have local, always on access.

They will likely remain something largely used by businesses but in my view it will be mostly because of practical concerns. The benefits of them won’t outweigh the cost anytime soon.

Agree. Unless some magic tech, like room temperature superconductors, turns up there will only be quantum as a service supplied for some very specific business needs.

Strong, post quantum encryption doesn’t require quantum computers. It uses different mathematical objects (e.g. matrices)

literally for speeding up linear algebra

For a sparse matrix where you don’t need the values of the solution vector.

I.e. a very specific use case.

Quantum computers will be called from libraries that apply very specific subroutines for very specific problems.

Consumers may occasionally call a quantum subroutine in a cloud environment. I very much doubt we will have a quantum chip in our phone.

Amazing computational speedups if you regularly use any of these incredibly specific algorithms. Otherwise useless.

Quantum as a service may exist as a business.

Specifically breaking prime number based cryptography.