Age based rule to be implemented

[kemajic]

Spanky and Griz68 are up there too.

Try as I may, I can gain no ground on Spanky. He leaves us all in the dust.

 

[mthoopsfan]

Yes, the NCAA's sweeping decision to adopt the "5-in-5" age-based eligibility model (allowing athletes five seasons of competition within a strict five-year window) is expected to squeeze high school recruiting.
While the new rule simplifies a notoriously confusing waiver process, it creates a math problem for high school recruits when combined with the transfer portal and new roster caps.

Why High School Recruits Will Face Tougher Math​

The shift creates a dynamic where college coaches are incentivized to favor older, proven college talent over fresh high school graduates.

1. The Death of the Redshirt "Buffer"​

Under the old rules, a coach might recruit a raw high school prospect, sit them for a year to develop (a "redshirt" year), and still get four full seasons of play out of them. Under the new model, your five-year clock starts automatically at age 19 or high school graduation. Because athletes can now play all five years, coaches can keep an experienced, 22-year-old starter for an extra season instead of replacing them with an 18-year-old rookie.
Main Street Media of Tennessee

2. Preference for "Proven Capital"​

College sports has essentially become a professionalized environment with revenue sharing and NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness). Given the choice between using a roster spot on a high school player who needs two years in the weight room or retaining a 5th-year senior who has already played 40 games of college football or basketball, coaches will increasingly lean toward experience.
PBS

3. Hard Roster Caps vs. Open Portals​

The NCAA also instituted hard roster size caps alongside the new scholarship rules (e.g., college football is capped at 105 players; baseball at 34). Because coaches have a strict limit on total roster spots and can no longer stash unlimited "walk-ons," every spot is precious. If older players occupy those spots for a 5th year, the number of open slots available for incoming high school freshmen naturally shrinks.
NCSA

The Bottom Line: High school athletes aren't being locked out entirely, but the "developmental" high school recruit is becoming a rarity. Elite, five-star recruits will still get their offers, but the three-star high school athlete who needs time to grow is increasingly being bypassed in favor of 5th-year seniors or experienced underclassmen from the transfer portal.
Wingert Grebing Brubaker & Walshok LLP

Source: Gemini.

 

[mthoopsfan]

For those pooh poohing or not using AI, see comments from the CEO of Nvidia, which is the largest company, by capitalization, in the world. Skim the bold parts.

"... the rules of everyday survival are changing, and fast.

To explain, Huang points to the automobile. Early cars were lethal, speeding into cities built for horses. Children played in the streets, and pedestrians crossed wherever they liked. The technology arrived instantly; the rules for surviving it took decades to catch up. Eventually, towns built sidewalks, traffic lights, and created driving tests. Play moved off the asphalt, because the cost of leaving it there was measured in body bags.

AI is forcing that exact same correction, only on a hyper-compressed timeline. Going forward, the wreckage won’t be measured in broken bones, but in broken dreams and erased bank accounts.

We are witnessing the birth of America’s next underclass: a permanent, tech-illiterate sub-stratosphere of the workforce. The defining divide of the next decade won’t be a simple gradient of rich versus poor, but a sort of two-tier caste system separating those who can command AI from those who cannot.

Picture the office version of this digital Darwinism. Everyone on the floor uses AI to summarize reports, audit spreadsheets, and draft the mind-numbing proposals nobody actually wants to write. One worker refuses. He does it all by hand, fiercely proud of his “honest, human effort.” By lunch, he is hopelessly behind. His colleagues have produced triple his output, automated their follow-ups, and taken an extra 20 minutes for coffee.

In this new reality, stubbornness is a professional suicide pact. The market, one fears, is about to punish the holdouts with a savagery we haven’t seen since the Industrial Revolution.

Huang’s prescription is simple: “Just go engage it.” Today, an ordinary person with zero coding knowledge can build a website, dissect a dense legal contract, or project a corporate budget. Skills once locked behind a $100,000 university degree are suddenly available to anyone who knows how to type a coherent sentence.

This shift will soon turn the traditional corporate ladder into a sheer cliff. The baseline assumption of modern employment is shifting to imply that any capable adult can steer these models. If you think avoiding AI makes you a noble purist, just wait until you find out your salary is being eclipsed by a middle schooler who treats ChatGPT like a calculator.

History has never been kind to the nostalgic. The blacksmith who laughed at the Model T didn’t slow down Henry Ford’s assembly line. The travel agent who mocked the internet didn’t stop Expedia. The future keeps its appointments, regardless of who refuses to show up.

This is why Huang’s warnings carry such weight. He is describing a permanent realignment of human value. A new underclass is emerging, defined not by what people earn, but by what they are no longer capable of doing. For millions of Americans, AI remains a curiosity — something to play with for five minutes and mock when it hallucinates a fact.

The tools improve at a punishing, exponential pace. Work that recently required a specialist and a six-figure salary now requires one person and a clear request. The walls around professional expertise are being demolished in real-time.

This leverage cuts both ways. A corner bodega can now deploy data analytics that used to require a multinational infrastructure. A scrappy startup can launch with a solo founder and a suite of algorithms rather than a staff of 40. Power no longer tracks the size of the building you walk into each morning, but rather the ability to direct the machine.

I’m no fan of our new algorithm overlords either, but the folks leveraging AI aren’t waiting for some futuristic sci-fi timeline. They work fast, gain more influence by the day, and leave the purists holding an empty bag. The ones who wait will likely watch the trapdoor close beneath them, wondering how the rest of the world left them behind.

Jensen Huang grew up playing in the streets before the cars took over. Now the robots are here. They are about to ruthlessly divide American society into two distinct groups: those who give the digital orders, and those who are made entirely obsolete by them.


https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/5942757-ai-demands-new-social-norms/

 

[alabamagrizzly]

For those pooh poohing or not using AI, see comments from the CEO of Nvidia, which is the largest company, by capitalization, in the world. Skim the bold parts.

"... the rules of everyday survival are changing, and fast.

To explain, Huang points to the automobile. Early cars were lethal, speeding into cities built for horses. Children played in the streets, and pedestrians crossed wherever they liked. The technology arrived instantly; the rules for surviving it took decades to catch up. Eventually, towns built sidewalks, traffic lights, and created driving tests. Play moved off the asphalt, because the cost of leaving it there was measured in body bags.

AI is forcing that exact same correction, only on a hyper-compressed timeline. Going forward, the wreckage won’t be measured in broken bones, but in broken dreams and erased bank accounts.

We are witnessing the birth of America’s next underclass: a permanent, tech-illiterate sub-stratosphere of the workforce. The defining divide of the next decade won’t be a simple gradient of rich versus poor, but a sort of two-tier caste system separating those who can command AI from those who cannot.

Picture the office version of this digital Darwinism. Everyone on the floor uses AI to summarize reports, audit spreadsheets, and draft the mind-numbing proposals nobody actually wants to write. One worker refuses. He does it all by hand, fiercely proud of his “honest, human effort.” By lunch, he is hopelessly behind. His colleagues have produced triple his output, automated their follow-ups, and taken an extra 20 minutes for coffee.

In this new reality, stubbornness is a professional suicide pact. The market, one fears, is about to punish the holdouts with a savagery we haven’t seen since the Industrial Revolution.

Huang’s prescription is simple: “Just go engage it.” Today, an ordinary person with zero coding knowledge can build a website, dissect a dense legal contract, or project a corporate budget. Skills once locked behind a $100,000 university degree are suddenly available to anyone who knows how to type a coherent sentence.

This shift will soon turn the traditional corporate ladder into a sheer cliff. The baseline assumption of modern employment is shifting to imply that any capable adult can steer these models. If you think avoiding AI makes you a noble purist, just wait until you find out your salary is being eclipsed by a middle schooler who treats ChatGPT like a calculator.

History has never been kind to the nostalgic. The blacksmith who laughed at the Model T didn’t slow down Henry Ford’s assembly line. The travel agent who mocked the internet didn’t stop Expedia. The future keeps its appointments, regardless of who refuses to show up.

This is why Huang’s warnings carry such weight. He is describing a permanent realignment of human value. A new underclass is emerging, defined not by what people earn, but by what they are no longer capable of doing. For millions of Americans, AI remains a curiosity — something to play with for five minutes and mock when it hallucinates a fact.

The tools improve at a punishing, exponential pace. Work that recently required a specialist and a six-figure salary now requires one person and a clear request. The walls around professional expertise are being demolished in real-time.

This leverage cuts both ways. A corner bodega can now deploy data analytics that used to require a multinational infrastructure. A scrappy startup can launch with a solo founder and a suite of algorithms rather than a staff of 40. Power no longer tracks the size of the building you walk into each morning, but rather the ability to direct the machine.

I’m no fan of our new algorithm overlords either, but the folks leveraging AI aren’t waiting for some futuristic sci-fi timeline. They work fast, gain more influence by the day, and leave the purists holding an empty bag. The ones who wait will likely watch the trapdoor close beneath them, wondering how the rest of the world left them behind.

Jensen Huang grew up playing in the streets before the cars took over. Now the robots are here. They are about to ruthlessly divide American society into two distinct groups: those who give the digital orders, and those who are made entirely obsolete by them.


https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/5942757-ai-demands-new-social-norms/

AI is the devil.

Revelations 15
The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed.

 

[tourist]

Mentally I'm 15. Unfortunately my physical body disagrees.

When I retired, I thought I'd try some physical work. I tried sacking potatoes, 50# sacks. 40+ years of desk work, studying, charting, where I lifted only the weight of a pencil or hypodermic syringe left me speechless, and pooped. I only lasted two hours. Mentally I could do anything, but physically...

I came across some good quotes on aging. They were all good, but I couldn't pick just one. Here's the link:

50 Of The Best Positive Aging Quotes I Could Find

SMART Living 365 is dedicated to exploring ideas and information that lead to a happier, more peaceful, and content life--365!

www.smartliving365.com