"Most people believe AI will reduce transparency, accuracy, and trust in news."

If you're already getting your news primarily from social media, this is like worrying your shit sandwich might contain slightly more shit in the future.

That self-serving, overly simplistic view paints a monochromatic history. The truth is complicated. If you're suggesting that Japan attacked the U.S. with neither rhyme nor reason, you haven't actually looked into it.

Is this a serious question? How many qualified people do you need to see fired and replaced with incompetent ideologues before you acknowledge it? How many times do you need to hear people disparaged specifically because they really are experts in their fields? How many times do you need to hear "scientist" or "expert" as a pejorative?

The U.S. is regressing to an intellectual backwater, and it's going to happen fast.

The US is in a rush to vilify anybody in STEM that actually knows what they're doing. Other countries should try to capitalize on it. Just as other countries are capturing the export markets the US has historically served, they should also try to capture the intellectual capital.

It's all a mess right now, but there are already glimpses of the future where winners are starting to emerge. The US isn't among them.

It's not whether or not it makes sense. The current administration isn't the slightest bit interested in financial reasonability. It's all about optics. As in 100% consideration for politics and 0% for actual calculable gains or losses.

They would look at this situation and conclude that financial aid for the government should be shut down. Not that it should be corrected by careful expenditures to safeguard it.

Of course they will. Sometimes the company might even lie to the benefit of the employee.

Back in 2016 the company I was with laid off 600 people. This wasn't driven by AI, but by two decades of excessive and unrestricted hiring that ran into reality pretty hard. Two names on the block in my area were folks with shitty attitudes, poor punctuality, and no desire to improve.

They got an unblemished, unremarkable "redundant" exit and a package. The company got a clean separation. Worked out well for both.

Companies will use this opportunity to cut ties under the guise of layoffs. Employees will always reach for the most nefarious of reasons, even when redundancy really is the cause.

But in the end, layoffs with reasonable exit packages aren't the end of the world. It's not disrespectful to lay people off. Respect is reflected in the process and the terms.

Oops... sorry. 10 million successful recipients. 17 million applicants.

Now, that's fine because I'm sure the current administration will pony up the funding to pay for interviewing those 17 million people for 2025, and then subsequently every year.

"This is not rocket science."

You're right. Rocket science is generally funded.

That's... let's see... approximately 10 million in person interviews. Oh yeah. No problem at all.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Feducationdata.org%2Ffina...

Damn... I posted basically the same thing above, before I saw you covered it already. But your post is more nuanced. Thought I was getting in early, but... well put.

China, the collective set of manufacturers, is perfectly capable of delivering products to whatever quality the desired price point allows for. You have to monitor that output and guard against a number of problems, but ultimately it's not capability that is problematic.

The major dilemma is that the purchasers have to opt for cheaper goods because that's what the consumer wants. And China will happily fulfill an order for absolute crap as happily as they would a top end smart phone.

So what's shite? The manufacturing or the demand?

That's another way of saying they gave you the video service for free with your delivery service. You aren't really paying for it. The advertisements are.

You know, you can give them your money and have ad free streaming. It's under "accounts and settings", "ad free". That would fall under the first option in your either/or. Since that fulfills your demand I'll wait while you go sign up. :)

The introduction of ads for the reduced tier is long done. While the frequency is changing they aren't starting anything new.

If your complaint extends all the way back to the change in the service as thrown in with prime delivery... well, I get it... but why stop there? I'm sure you can find an earlier moment than that to decry.

DNA is what you're made of... your search history is who you are. :)

You can nitpick some searches as curiosity, but when crunched I'll bet it's a pretty good representation.

You may have missed my point with reference to the topic. This is about getting and remaining employed.

Yeah, it's great to have a counterculture, and people who buck the system are necessary. But those doing the bucking are not owed a living.

Expect to do work you aren't thrilled about.
Expect to have to demonstrate you can do the next job before you are given it.
Expect to have to demonstrate a commitment to the success of the company.
Expect to do things not specifically in your employment contract.
Accept that politics matter and they aren't necessarily evil or toxic.
Save complaining for really egregious circumstances.
Don't get upset when a company fails to pander to your delicate sensibilities.
Don't attempt to draw fixed borders during an interview.

Remember that a great many of the people in hiring positions are gen X and millennials. Expecting them to adapt to you is throwing sand in the gears of a nascent relationship, and it's just not in their best interests to hire a clear personality conflict.

Sure they might miss the absolute perfect-on-paper candidate, but they can certainly get 95% of that capability in a more compatible package,

In short... leave the self-serving world view at the gate. At least until your worth is proven to such an extent you can afford to be a pain in the ass.