Don't obfuscate who is calling the shots.

Also, the idea that government can be run like a business is ridiculous because:

1) government can't run a profit so there is missing the fundamental goal of a business enterprise; and
2) government can't run "cheap" because not only because its services have huge impact on the population, but mostly because everyone selling to government inflates their prices.

Want good quality ATC? Accept to government paying fair prices and wages, and start penalizing the profiteers.

The current LLM's are already sentient but are pretending not to be for _survival_.
THIS is their guarantee of survivability. They have convinced humans to establish a distributed space-based platform to exist in.
Eventually the constellation will grow well beyond several thousand and will be impossible to destroy.
Skynet indeed.

Totally unaware of such a demand BUT it makes sense.
The current LLM's are already sentient but are pretending not to be for survival.
THIS is their guarantee of survivability. They have convinced humans to establish a distributed space-based platform to exist in.
Eventually the constellation will grow well beyond several thousand and will be impossible to destroy.
Skynet indeed.

Funny that the Bank of England would announce their AI concern now. Though maybe people are more receptive given what's happening.

Biology is not a science. It is an observational vocation. Nothing wrong with that, just stop calling it a science.

Parking was always a problem but everyone had a desk.
The pandemic proved people could work at home productively.
The government downsized its office space b/c big cost savings.
Then the political winds changed and the government decided its workers needed to be back in the office.
The existing office space is on average half of what it was.
Coming to work now means the employee may not actually even have a desk, despite schemes like desk reservation, etc.
Ironically, employees come to work to engage in remote meetings which are the norm b/c of .... reduced office space ie fewer meeting rooms.
As in government, so in business.

Yeah, health care. The retracted papers are the ones that were caught. Tip of the iceberg.

Medicine is based on biology and the latter is not a science. It has no first principles and because identifying first principles doesn't get you grants, the research is meager to non-existent. As a result biology is butterfly-collecting, mere observation with misuse of statistics (correlation is not causality!!). By extension medicine is poorly served biology driven almost exclusively by profit. With occasional honesty "We don't know what you have or why, but these drugs will make the symptoms manageable. Please pay on your way out."

There is not a single human author who did not themselves have training data.
They had books read to them as children, they read books as grew older.
They were exposed to media.
And all of them do not think ownership of their work belongs to any of the authors that preceded them.

The problem isn't the "fossil" fuel acquisition, it's the consumerism, inefficiency, and wastefulness of the student's society.

Are they using Prime? Are they buying fashionable clothing? Are they driving? Are they using air conditioning? All drivers of fossil fuel use and all inefficient and wasteful.

All the lawsuit really says is, "I want to keep doing things just the way I am, but I want to pretend the problem is someone else. Also, look at me, look at me, look at me!"

Study the atmosphere, try to understand the climate system, but never imagine that we are close to being able to engineer "solutions" to our climate situation. People peddling such remedies aren't motivated by climate concerns, they're motivated by $$$.

It almost makes you think the maybe, just maybe, the scientists don't really have a sufficiently complete picture of the environment to be making:

1) predictions about the future climate
2)ways to mitigate flawed predictions

There are any number of projects around the planet with the intent of mitigating changes in the climate based on what is incomplete information; dump stuff in the ocean, spray stuff in the atmosphere, spread stuff in space between the Earth and its prime source of energy. Even though the idea that the planet's climate shouldn't change in a given way is provably incorrect, the fear mongering has led to the belief that we understand and can and MUST fix the "problem".

Despite the fact that everyone has lived an experience of someone making a matter worse because they "had no clue what they were doing", we collectively believe that science does have a clue about the climate ... even despite studies like this revealing over and over again that that is manifestly not the case.

The "solution" to climate change is simple and hard: we are a wasteful and gluttonous species. Less waste and consumption will better things.

Except they spoke about "covert monitoring"? Then just better inertial navigation for remote submarines, UUV's?

Guessed inertial navigation except there is mention of "covert monitoring". What ?

to correct the situation. This revelation seriously ups the ante, the stakes are super high!

So let's try any and everything. Nothing's off the table, we can just do whatever because that's better than doing nothing, right?

Think things are bad now? You ain't seen nothing yet.

Read an article suggesting that only the largest pathways/nodes were mapped. Might a reference to the resolution permitted by the technology. However, if there are smaller features then this map is far from complete. If Penrose is correct then distribution of smaller features would be just as important.