I mean, it could just get sold to a massive advertising tracking and data pushing company. Or at this rate the FCC will find some BS statute to accuse it for and find a way to give it to Musk or Elison.

Give it until tomorrow before someone on his team has to either translate what Trump meant, or explain that Trump was “just kidding”.

Or... it's like the Iran war... "Hey you know I didn't realize how cool inflation is now... did you know my same old car now can hold $75 worth of gas, it used to only hold 30. Plus you know what, Wages are just lagging behind the inflation a little bit, just give it a few months, and the free market will increase our paychecks.

I mean, in the hypothetical example I believe the implication was not one that trump survived. So a better analogy would be turning point USA. Of which yeah general like and "honoring" of charlie certainly went up. But on the whole the influence of turning point USA seems to be less. As far as the overall, I'm not sure how to really judge how that would go in this hypothetical would b long term.

More accurately they know trump won't follow through on the negotiations. Trump says he's going to bomb you, there's a 50/50 chance he will bomb you. Trump says he's going to talk peacefully, there's a 100% chance either the US or Isreal is going to be bombing durring or before the negotiations and during whatever cease fire is negotiated.

I mean I love that idea, but doesn't sound like it's a solution to this problem. Hardware costs are the issue, and unfortunately even with the source code and plans, we cant compile our own GPUs and Ram

and as if this isn't something that flags with the historical trends

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

In short, up till the 1970s worker pay and productivity moved nearly in perfect sync with each-other, more stuff happens, people get paid more, then, it stopped, company profits shot up, while worker pay barely went up at all (could be argued it went down due to inflation), Point is fixing that part first is kind of what matters. Then we can look into expecting the average person to care about "productivity" going up, THEN we can start finding out if AI is even being directed in a way that accomplishes that.

doesn't google voice require another phone number to register?

it is also worth pointing out because we are thinking of the car comparison... but cheetah's only spend a very brief time anywhere close to their top speed (usually under 30 seconds). A cheetah attack is over one way or the other in seconds, and a cheetah would almost die of heat stroke if it sprinted for a full minute.

Staff is also usually instructed to make you buy more as well.

Anyway my key point isn't that kiosks are flawless, my point is, there is a tangible benefit, a reason why a decent portion of people may actually get a benefit to them from a kiosk. (IE less factors for order mistakes, potentially easier time finding what they want, some people don't want to have to use their voice and talk to someone at all).

My point is, in the fast food restraunts in my area, the ones that have kiosks, mostly also have human casheers as well, and even when the restraunt is slow and there's no line for either one, it's close to 50/50 of where people go to. While if an AI voice bot were added, I would be shocked if 1% of people would chose that over a human or a kiosk.

Kiosks, by definition reduce the points of failure in making an order. If I order through a human.

I might mis-speak, Employee might mishear me, Employee might hit the wrong button.

When I use the kiosk... I might hit the wrong button.

That's a clear defined advantage of the system on the fundimental level

an AI drive through window

I might mispeak, AI might mishear me, AI might do something unexpected even with the correct data. All the flaws of humans and kiosks.

and I'm sure it won't turn itself back on anyway every software update... with 15 promtps "hey are you really sure you don't want to use this, we've improved it, why don't you try it again before you disable it again".

Where are you getting the idea that github is open source? GitHub CAN host open source software... and git is open source. GitHub is a website that allows people to upload content... and the source code is not open, and controlled by microsoft.

Now as far as whether usernames are changable on actual opensource websites... that's also not a given. That's a matter of if the software chooses to allow it. If the website doesn't, you are welcome to take the source code, edit the source code to make it possible, and host your own copy of it. But nothing in open source inherently means you have any more control of an open source website that's hosted outside of your machine/servers than a closed source one.

I mean the problem with drive throughs is that's like the most painful way to order anything. Doesn't matter if it's a human or an AI. Lets talk on a garbage speaker 6 feet away with traffic, wind and everything else inbetween. Without being able to see the face of the person. Know when or if the feed has been cut off, also the added fun of the speed being terrible and of course the ability to get stuck because even if you realize it's not worth the time... a car can pull up behind you and force you to wait it out as long as it takes.