we just have to accept their is a wanna be mob boss in the White House

Yeah, that’s how democracy works in this case.

Getting on Trump’s bad side can mean an anti-trust lawsuit or an end to tariff exemptions. With billions of dollars at stake, the executives would be negligent to act otherwise.

I’m a big fan of his, but I’m also not sure he’s the right person to judge what a mentally healthy, well-adjusted individual should act like.

I meant that I would be paying extra for it as opposed to a hypothetical car manufactured without the requirement. So it would be like having my taxes raised to pay for providing me something I didn’t want.

Maybe this makes me sound like a jerk, but my thinking in that regard was “I don’t have children and rarely drive near other people’s loose children. Why should I pay for hardware I don’t need?”

I deliberately sought out a car without that stuff when I had to buy a new(er) car recently. It’s usually quite annoying - the worst was a rental car that had an alarm buzz whenever I activated my turn signal while there was another car anywhere near my blind spot.

IMO the only technological improvement from the last decade and a half that’s worth having is a backup camera, and that’s only because I must shamefully confess to being terrible at parallel parking without one despite having years of practice. (I was tempted to buy a Miata since they still have real dials, but ultimately I did settle for a car with a digital display instead of an instrument panel.)

Other former staff members were reassigned to Alphabet’s drug-discovery company Isomorphic Labs, which is a DeepMind spin-off.

They’re still actively working on this area of research.

Tax exemptions for activity that would not have taken place without those tax exemptions cost the state nothing - no money is being “thrown” and no potential tax income is being forgone. Meanwhile, giving “poor guys” $200,000 a year costs $200,000 per year per poor guy. That’s the difference.

Well no, they couldn’t have, because this is money they can’t get in any case. Data centers that aren’t built don’t pay taxes.

Would having experts capable of telling real videos from fake ones even solve the main problem, that being the problem of public perception? The experts would have an important role in, for example, intelligence agencies, but the public is still going to trust its eyes, and in the presence of multiple contradictory videos, its biases, especially since there’s always going to be someone claiming to be an expert to back them up.

I’m not saying it does, but the evidence presented here isn’t showing that it doesn’t. Consider a toy model in which most children are “good” and never misbehave, but some children are “bad” and often misbehave. Parents physically punish misbehaving children, and physical punishment does reduce misbehavior. This model would show the same “physically punished children behave worse” outcome that the article describes.

The article doesn’t mention how they’re ruling out the standard “bad behavior causes physical punishment” interpretation.

It’s more reasonable than the headline makes it sound. The commissioner pointed out that he’s not in charge of the decision to use Flock cameras and told the group of people who wanted to express their opposition to him anyway to pick one representative who would do so.

I’ve been to meetings where people repeatedly express the same negative opinion of a policy to someone with no control over that policy and I guess that’s what the commissioner wanted to avoid.

Why? There’s no crime here.

The last ceasefire lasted little more than a year and Hezbollah used that time to rebuild, so I think that a new ceasefire now is not likely to be in Israel’s best interest, especially if it involves ceding occupied territory. Trump just wants to claim victory (and he might get away with it politically because the effects of failure on life in the USA will be significant but indirect) but the security of the people in northern Israel depends on actually achieving victory.

I didn’t say that Israel is not on the offensive right now - it is. My point is that if the Iron Dome system is indeed compromised, that’s going to put pressure on Israel to stay on the offensive rather than to back down.

Let’s hope they keep this up and force Israel to back the fuck off.

I don’t see the same connection here that you do. A failure of Israel’s defensive weapons would require them to go on the offensive. The status quo from before the October 7 attacks was tolerable to Israel because they could shoot down incoming threats but if they no longer can, they must neutralize the ability of their enemies to launch those threats.

Very occasionally I run into something that used to be doable without a smartphone but requires a smartphone now, but that’s quite rare. Not having a smartphone now would be very inconvenient, but generally not more inconvenient than living without a smartphone was before they existed. I expect the same with this technology, if it ever arrives.

I’m not sure why the tone is so negative in this article given that the plan being discussed is to make the technology so useful that most people want it despite the disadvantages. That’s not coercion.

I don’t think it’s something dogs are physiologically capable of doing, and even if it were, I think it’s unlikely that dogs would be trained to do it on command.