what

this problem does not look remotely interesting

Yep. Just some mechanical calculation.

The original text was from 1978 according to other sources

Ah, thanks. Yes it couldn't have been 2010 because he died in 2002. But the date this was written is important, otherwise his references to "the last decade" don't mean anything!

Many would say that "the last decade" (with the surrounding context) is timeless, or at least that it is still relevant today.

Right, it seemed earlier.

so the point of this is to give more power to the algorithm (since it includes unintentional autoplays) and less power to the people who upload the videos?

In all infinite scroll streaming apps algorithm have the power, I don't this will change that.

how could anyone possibly know that?

it begs the question of using optics for ML?

Its a thing: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41377-024-01590-3

MNIST classifier using a DNN: https://www.nature.com/articles/s44172-024-00211-6

how is the proletariat oppressed by an ordinary non-management software developer?

It doesnt matter. What matters is what side you are perceived to be on.

Drives rents up for ordinary people.

why should it be straightforward to establish that?

that could directly cause a death

High particulate emissions directly cause deaths.

Everyone is born with a fatal disease called life.

why wouldn't those people just donate to Mozilla?

Because historically that money has been squandered on C-suite salaries, irrelevant acquisitions (Pocket), and development that has nothing to do with the browser (like failing to make a phone OS).

AFAICT donations to Mozilla aren't used to fund Firefox development.