Why not? If you need to do global transfers without the hassle of going through a bunch of different financial systems, but you don't want the insane volatility of regular crypto, then stablecoins are a good choice. Problem is that there have been a bunch of stablecoins that have proven to be not very, well, stable. Something issued by a central bank should at least have sufficient backing to actually be stable.

What you might not want is an official digital currency with a whole bunch of rules and surveillance attached.

Doesn't have to be blockchain-based, though. Sure, it's a bit easier to set up a blockchain instead of a unified settlement system, but it does come with a number of drawbacks as well. Many EU banks did a bunch of Fintech experiments a couple of years ago, all on blockchain, because it was easy to set up and perfect for experimentation. But the experiments they kept were moved to centralized systems. I'm not sure if banks here still have anything running on blockchain.

Though in this case there's another advantage of using blockchain: it would make it easier for those outside of the EU to make use of this digital euro, in case they prefer it over something pegged to the dollar.

What are the alternatives to Oracle and SAP for ERP? I'm aware that there are a few other companies operating in this space, but I've no idea whether or not they are as mature as those two, and if they could fulfill the needs of the Birmingham council.

That has gotten a lot better in recent times. The popups used to always offer "Accept" and "Configure" options, with the configure option presenting a screen with said 100 checkboxes. But more and more often I see popups that also have a "Reject all" button.

People likely to succeed in managing a business will be low in trait agreeableness. This is well known and has been known for years.

Despite the apparent implication of "disagreeable" people being bad, it means that such people are more focused on themselves, unlikely to be swayed by the opinions of others, and more self serving. It's a trait that allows businesses to succeed, by having the owner focus on the success goals of the business instead of the success goals of other people.

Contrast with high agreeableness, where the person is more externally focused. Psychologists and nurses would typically be high agreeableness.

Everyone has an agreeableness score, and it's a bell curve. The fact that there are people who aren't "fair" is compensated by people who are exceptionally giving.

Reform copyright, allow derivative works, abolish moral rights. What's the worst that could happen? Solves the problem of AI being "inspired" by existing works. Well, perhaps someone will write a crappy HP-inspired story about Tanya Grotter, a machine-gun wielding lady wizard who goes after bad Chechens (that is a real book, BTW). So what? The goal of copyright is cultural abundance, and that will (eventually) include AI generated works.

Look at Nosferatu, considered to be one of the great vampire movies. The movie was called that because they did not secure the copyright to the Dracula story, and after a lost lawsuit they had to destroy all copies and negatives. Luckily a few survived, and we can still enjoy it.

Exactly what background and/or career does prepare one well for the presidency? A law degree? Founding a successful business? A career in politics? An MBA? Perhaps being a comedian. Or perhaps the job (like many high level managerial jobs) is such a complex multi-faceted one that no career is going to prepare you for it, and no background is a great predictor for success. Perhaps it is more about personality than experience, but even that is not a great predictor. I've seen plenty of politicians who looked great for the job, only to turn out complete rubbish, or the other way around. Or a brilliant mayor who turned out to be a shit minister. And it depends on circumstances as well... one of our MPs is remembered as lackluster and ineffectual, but I think he would have been great if times had been different. Likewise I think that Zelensky would have been a so-so president in peacetime conditions... but he stepped up brilliantly after his country got invaded. Kind of how people look back on Churchill... before the war, people didn't think he was all that either.

Third options never go anywhere in a de facto two party system. You need 2 stage voting: "I want to vote for [independent candidate] but if he doesn't make the cut, I want my vote to go to [rep / dem]"

The real sad case is that there's nothing in the vast collection of film and TV that suits your taste. There seems to be plenty for everyone else.

That's why it's a mutual fund investing in multiple ventures, not individual investors putting their money into individual start-ups.

Yes and no. It's true that "we" are burning all of the oil and gas, and are responsible for the demand. But oil companies themselves emit around 15% of all greenhouse gases in the process of producing, transporting and refining oil, before they sell it to us. That's not an insignificant amount, and perhaps there's a lot of room for further improvement. They already stopped practices like flaring off that pesky natural gas that is produced along with oil.

The same goes for the manufacturers of concrete: they emit a lot of CO2 in the process... but only do so to satisfy our need for the stuff.

I've dealt with call center agents from the USA, China, India, down to local ones. And all of the agents that take the call pretty much only run a script to cover the most common cases. But all of them can and will kick the call up to people who can actually help. The one thing I hate (and call centers from all parts of the world still do this) is when they make you walk through all the pointless troubleshooting steps in the script before they escalate your call.

Be careful what you wish for. This is something that Canada and the EU might want to return in kind, because the massive untaxed trade imbalance between us and the US regarding digital goods and services has been a thorn in our governments' side for a good while now.

Zoox doesn't have a steering wheel or pedals. You do not have control of it (except for the emergency red stop button).

Right now, Zoox can not even deviate from a hardcoded preprogrammed route, so it's a long ways to be true self-driving either.

Notice how the routes it does in San Francisco or in Vegas are always the same circuits.

Getting a DUI on it wouldn't make any sense.

This hasn't been tested yet legally.

However, if operator guidance is needed (autodrive levels 1, 2, and 3, driver must remain engaged), then you are operating the vehicle and can be charged.

For levels 4 and 5, if you're behind the wheel and could turn off the autodrive features, legal opinion is that you can still be charged (you're effectively in control).

If you're not in the driver's seat and the car is level 4 and 5 (and autodriving), then there's a strong legal argument that you're not operating the vehicle and can't be charged.

(And note that if you're autodriving, there should be no reason for the cop to pull you over in the first place.)

IANAL, this is just something I researched awhile ago.