Yeah, it was very funny seeing trump grovel before China after the tariff bluff failed.

You could have just said "I got nothing", you know :)

Yeah, I like to ask rhetorical questions.

The student was just mimicking the baseless claims of the so-called "industry" about the ground-breaking capabilities of "AI".

Why can Sam, Satya, the son or Errol and many other snake oil peddlers make equally baseless claims without any harm, but the student cannot?

Or, to put the question in the proper form, why does only this student face consequences for the baseless claims and not the snake oil peddlers?

These days the Chinese government isn't any less trusty than that of the USA.

Nevermind that, the research in TFA is from a Finland-based organization that looks fairly independent and not taking political sides. What are your specific reasons to distrust them or their reports?

The biggest disadvantage per the analysis of the second group was that wolves don't have the long relationship with humans, so they simply don't have the habit of "using" them and manipulating them that the dogs have.

So, not a question of "smartness", but an outcome of a different skill set due to different lifestyle.

Why does Emma assume people are "lonely"? They aren't, so there is nothing for zuck the droid to "solve". Or for Emma to muse about.

Yep, I sit on a board or two, and recently it isn't the millennials or younger who would ignore the problem that is being discussed because they are too busy to hammer chatgpt with requests for something to say, it is people in their 40s and 50s, who should know better, having grown up without being attached to a fondle-slab all the time.

The market for neuralink-like shit is now obvious though.

If these can do all that chat-gpteeing and regurgitation without petting or reading a glass panel all the time, they'll go for it.

Stupid and lazy has won.

I see, thanks.

I do not. Whatever "contradictions" are there, they are in your confused brain.

Really? Where did I mention labor costs?

Of course not. I said "where costs are minimal and output quantities can satisfy their demand".

Which is what Tim Cook is saying above.

You're confused because you have limited ideas about how costs are minimized.

It has been a while since I read it, but I don't recall anything particularly "dark".

This must be the group that has brought most value to microsoft barring nobody else. Every boss in the world at some point in time to their BOFH:

- Simon, what do we need to have Solitaire, reversi and mines on this computer?
- Windows.
- Get licenses for everyone!11!

Of course, but this is so obvious that I'm usually glossing over it. You're right to emphasize it, as consumer surplus is probably one of the largest single benefit factors here, if not the largest.

I understand why it is a surprise for you, but let me tell you a secret: skillful labor lowers the cost of production. Skillful labor who can built tools reduces the cost of production dramatically.

No, I didn't. But the only way you can argue is apparently to pick one point of many and pretend it is the only one.