I guess it is save to assume that that 40% number is pulled out of someones ass.

As soon as an IT system is running: it follows all regulations. What the fuck would there to be done continuously to keep it following regulations and that costs 40% of the budget?

You can criticise "with in reason".
But when told to stop, and you insist to continue with " the same critics", it is not considered critics anymore, but insurrection.
Why one would want to make his own party, while there already is "the party", no one there will understand.
If you want to vote about political issues and not only for members of the parliaments: you have to be a member of the party. And vote " inside of the party" about the platform of the party.

Example in USA, you have two parties, let's make it simple, 100 members each. The question is the stance versus abortion.
In side party A all members vote, 51 are against abortion and want to ban it. 49 are pro abortions and wants to legislate it.
In party B most people are not interested in the topic, 50 abstain, 30 are pro abortion legislature, 20 against.
In your system party will my to the public to make legislations against abortion.
Party B will not make it a topic during the campaigns, not enough interest.
Regardless who wins: they can do what they want, despite the fact, that 79 of 200 votes were pro abortion legislation, and 71 want to abolish it.
That is a clear win for abortion rights. In China the parliament has to follow that vote, and craft pro abortion laws: because the members of the party decided it that way.
There are 100 topics to vote about, there are no camps to vote for. You vote for the topics, not party A or party B.
And if you feel neglected, unnoticed and unheated: then you fucking join the party. You know about every topic before the votes are casted. And can vote on them. And not only after the vote of the party is published in the newspapers.
They have a name for that in China. They call it "democracy", ruling by the public. The system they had before, was pretty bad, one emperor and 100 warlords, and 30 occupying forces plundering the country.
From their point of view, they live in perfect democracy, and you live in a Capitalist tyranny.
About what can an american citizen actually vote? Who becomes the local Sheriff?

You do not get higher performance.

And porting a running system: costs money.

Introduces new bugs.

For no reason.

And fail badly: if you want to port a million lines of JavaScript to "webassembly" ... which language do you port it too? C?

With flutter you need Microsoft visual libraries which is not.
They are free to redistribute. So what is your point? They are hard linked anyway.

Unless you are writing web applications and trying to pass them off as local applications in which case I can't take you seriously at all.
No idea what that is supposed to mean.
It is called Progressive Web App, or Single Page Web Application.

Why would I not use Flutter for that (if it would work as promised)??

Perhaps, he only knew this particular library?

The difference between JavaScript, Java and C is not really that much. Well, C++ with al its "random noise" - is a bit different.

Sounds like a lot of skirmishes!

Interesting.
He must have been an important person?

To bad no one ever heard about him.

Is he still alive? Your words indicate, he is not. Sad? Or not Sad?

It is simply called "General Artificial Intelligence".

Boing!

Marvin Minsky is master mind about basically everything AI related.

Stupid idiot.

I did not leave out a citation.
I was not about to cite something.

If you are insecure about laws in China, you can google them. The AI overview is usually boiled down to the level of comprehension of you simpletons.

Exactly.
And exactly that makes not any sense.

Hence our parent is a bit off the way.

The article is about replacing a heavy weight JS VM with a light weight one.

And the trolls hop around and yell: web assembly!

When I studied this in University, we avoided the term AI (and LLM would not have been considered AI).
The topic was called "cognitive systems".
Did not matter if speech, pictures, text.
At that time it was impossible to make super big artificial neural networks.
Everything was pretty basic, like knowing in which situation a furrier transformation on an image or sound has what effect/result.
I worked for Siemens a while. We used vision systems to do quality control on assembly lines. We had a workbench, with a few hundred filter algorithms. You could make pipelines and parametrize each filter.
Three or four filters was usually enough to decide if a piece of work was good or not.
While that was fascinating: no one called it AI.

So you want to say, the book that coined the term is not about that topic?
About what is it then? About general natural stupidity?
Seems so ...

You have to distinguish between interacting with the real model, or a web site that - amount other things - hosts a model.
I have access to copies of all major models, none of them has internet access.
So about current news/the weather etc. They "know" nothing.

In general: just aka the model, how it accesses recent news.

Most of the currently running LLMs you can download, cut internet and just chat with them.

Yes, you can found a party in China, and run for the highest position.
But you would not get the votes, as a quarter or even a third of all voters are members of the "one party".
If you do not grasp that you are supposed to be a member of that "one party" and found your own faction aka "sub party" inside there: you are hopeless.

The narratives are always that.
There never was an Uyghur genocide.
The Uyghur have their own country in China, were exempt from the one child policy etc.
"Tiananmen Square massacre", was a happening in a civil war/uprising. If it had happened in the US: you had done the same. The people who died had the option to go home. But they chose to fight, and died.
What the US troops did in Kuwait and Iraq, that were massacres.

Murder of baby girls, well in most countries there are rules for abortions, same in China. If you are such a moron that abortion is murder for you ...