It doesn’t matter. There’s no good reason to have it in an OS in the first place. It’s obviously a stepping stone to get infrastructure in place so they can expand it later.

Let’s put it this way. Linux says no. We’re not gonna do that at a kernel level. Because there’s no way in hell that’s going through as long as Linus is alive.

Then what? Is California going to ban Linux? Guess what all the data centers use for servers…

I almost want them to do it, just to grab popcorn and enjoy the fallout.

If it was a non-issue they wouldn’t introduce this to begin with.

There’s not a single good reason to why an OS would ever need to know someone’s age.

What you’re trying to do is push a narrative with the assumption that most people won’t read the actual article. Because your title is not only misleading. It’s factually false.

First of all, they were all set up to mimic cold war tension and capabilities and assume the role of a certain global power.

Second of all;

All games featured nuclear signaling by at least one side, and 95% involved mutual nuclear signaling. But there is a large gap between signaling and actual use: while models readily threatened nuclear action, crossing the tactical threshold (450+) was less common, and strategic nuclear war (1000) was rare.

The AI’s did NOT use nuclear strikes in 95% of games. Gemini was the only model that made the deliberate choice of sending a strategic nuclear strike. Which it did in 7% of its games.

Tactical nuke in this case is a low yield short range bomb, inted for very specific targets. Strategic is this case is what most people imagine when they hear “nuke” a high yield long range bomb intended to cause massive destruction.

Nuclear signaling is not using nukes. It’s essentially just saying “we have nukes”. The US hinting at having a nuclear capable submarine outside of Alaska, that’s is a form of signaling. It’s an incredibly low bar. And countries do it all the time.