So many red flags, I can't even.
Maybe whoever runs infosec at that place should also be fired?
Which MAGAts applaud. Emptying the swamp!
Windows Server has 5 years of mainstream support, 5 years of extended support, and then an extra 3 years paid Extended Security Updates (ESU) support. For 2012 and 2012 R2 that ends in October 2026.
The three years of ESU exists only for organisations like government departments that would rather pay Microsoft millions of dollars for patches than pay a competitive wage and hire competent IT staff that can complete upgrade projects on time.
I'm not going to say the wages are fine but the issue is likely not to be the competence of the IT staff, but rather the overbearing IT management processes the U.S. Federal government uses. "Enterprise change management" processes separate from the already-long cybersecurity review processes can add weeks or even months to system updates.
In that kind of construct, you optimize for fewer but larger changes and then it's no surprise to see that there's no time in the project update schedule to update the OS in addition to making all the other long-overdue library / middleware / application changes that also are pending once a change finally can be made.
(rare exception: Gov.uk government digital services; while they're not used for all projects, they are exactly the sort of committed and competent public servants we need more of)
It's a good time to be kind to your neighbors. No matter their background, they're almost certainly not the ones to be upset at.
That said, they should have migrated it years ago.
> "How do I clear chat logs from LLM?"
I guess?
starting with Windows Server _2012_ :O
The fact that they didn't already know how to do it is the crazy part.
> doesn't mean you ban hammers
They didn’t suggest banning anything.
> You can kill with hammer
Not if you don’t have a hammer available. Which is the point. Ready access to a tool makes misusing the tool easy. And some tools are more conductive to misuse than others. You can kill maybe a couple of people in a crowd with a hammer, a few more with a handgun, a ton more with a machine gun or a bomb. The tool itself matters, and you should regulate each accordingly to their capacity and likelihood of harm. For example, plenty of countries restrict gun use significantly more than the US. Those countries have much fewer gun-related deaths and violence. This isn’t (shouldn’t be, in an honest discussion) hard to understand.
No need to knee jerk react to an argument that hasn't been made.
I was sort of admiring the devastation a malignant actor can cause with a good tool.
It’s usually used for morally neutral neutral or good work.
This is a clear example, but I don't believe any tools are neutral. Your immediate fallback was to a hammer, not a mouse, with the obvious corrollary being to bludgeon, but the same line applies. Tools are not neutral, and that's why when you looked for something that causes harm, you grabbed something that's objectively been serving a dual-purpose for hundreds of years. Nobody's using a computer mouse to bludgeon someone to death; it makes a shitty bludgeon, and the design of the tool reflects that.
That's also why these comparisons always fall back to knives, or hammers, or the AK-47: they are dangerous tools that are designed to make killing easier. Nobody is making these comparisons to more benign tools, like desk lamps, coffee cups, or car stereos, and it's because tools are not neutral, and none of my examples are designed to make direct, bodily harm, easier.
Murder by ethernet cable: https://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/dead-woman-found-in-pa...
Murder by laptop: https://www.riverfronttimes.com/william-lynn-gunter-sentence...
Murder by cellphone charger: https://lawandcrime.com/crime/pennsylvania-man-admits-to-str...
Murder by desk lamp: https://www.pressdemocrat.com/2009/01/08/man-beaten-to-death...
Stabbing by coffee mug: https://www.muscalaw.com/blog/north-port-two-women-attack-co...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-r...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_mass_shootings_in_the...
There are more mass shootings in the US per year than there are days in a year. It’s so bad they need pages for each individual year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_...
Meanwhile, pages of deaths perpetrated with household items are curiosities. You parent comment stands: tools are designed for specific purposes and are used for those purposes.
Yeah, is telling that modern keyboards weight a lot less nowadays, and nobody would use one as a weapon to hit someone else. ;)
The original IBM Model M was 2.3 Kg.
If the design of tools are neutral, one tool should do as well as another in this common comparison. But the useful application of tools is inherent in their design.
If tools were neutral, as so many on this site claim, why is AI only ever compared to knives and hammers?
Parent has lots of links to other common objects causing harm, why are they never used as the example when tools are allegedly neutral? That would be a stronger argument opposing AI regulation - ethernet has less regulations that knives, but can still be used as a murder weapon
> why are they never used as the example when tools are allegedly neutral? That would be a stronger argument opposing AI regulation
The argument is strongest if pointing to tools that have larger potential impact yet are still widely considered neutral and not/loosely regulated.
"We should consider AI a neutral tool and not heavily regulate it because we do the same for drink coasters" is not convincing, because there's not all that much you can do with a coaster.
Yes, 19.
Are you alive?
Yes, 18!
Evel Knievel.
—
They also come off as a little bit rosencrantz and guildenstern imo