Being a passenger in Falcon/Dragon being allowed to take pictures of export controlled parts of Falcon/Dragon. This isn't rocket science and you should be able to understand that.
Photographic memory doesn't include being able to determine the dimensions or other many other aspects of objects that pictures can nor does it imply being able to produce an accurate drawing from memory.
Depends on the property value, I suppose. If the value is high enough that people are occupying 6 story apartments next door, it's probably close to being more effective than having 50ksqf of ground level parking, enabling other more fulfilling (profitable) uses.
I'm not suggesting parking decks. Think a modular pallet, perhaps with the charging equipment built in with a 480v bus connection at one end, with a cooling duct loop. Everything being modular makes it easy to maintain, and swap out bad parts for good without impairing operation. A glorified robotic forklift picks the whole thing up, car and all, and slots it into a heavy duty rack. Presto-chargo. It could be designed to fit in with other commercial buildings.
Would it be expensive? Probably, but Everything is relative, and some places real-estate is more valuable than the building that sits on it.
I mean, let's just come up with a hypothetical example. Let's say that baby formula manufacturers realize that the specific tests used by the regulator to check for protein can be fooled by melamine and so they use melamine as an ingredient to save money while fooling the regulator. Consequently hundreds of thousands of babies get sick and tens of thousands are hospitalized with some dying, and that's just the ones that are known about. Should the regulators be the only ones that get in trouble while the executives who made the decisions buy themselves some private islands? I mean, A. that's not a hypothetical example and, B. I just do not understand what you are trying to argue here. Maybe it's my fault, but it just seems incomprehensible to me given the actual, real-world history of corporate behavior when it comes to food and drug safety.
I presume you're referring to the 2008 Chinese Milk Scandal? I'll point out this was something perpetrated by the Chinese industry, not American. It was knowingly covered up with the complicity of the Chinese government to prevent it from embarrassing the ongoing Olympics. Only when the scandal became impossible to cover up did the CCP take any action.
As of December 2025, San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie and former Mayor London Breed have both expressed praise for China and the relationship between San Francisco and Chinese cities.
I've seen videos of these waymo lots and it is far and away the most idiotic system designed by people who are probably rather intelligent.
The problem is insisting that a charging depot for autonomous cars should look and behave as a traditional car park. It should be a fully enclosed garage, to keep out the rifraff, with a palletized racking system. When there is vacancy, the car would be signaled to drive onto the pallet, and the robot in the garage slots it into an available spot, silently. When the charge is complete, the car is put back out to the road and oriented such that it doesn't need to back out.
It could be built underground, above ground or adjacent to a traditional car garage. The neighborhood would be insulated from equipment noise, car noise, and it would occupy a fraction of the real estate.
To see if people will be more devious and evil if the joker is present
They tried to do Jesus, but passengers kept calling security about a hippy boarding the plane.
A new study has found that people are more likely to act kind towards others when Batman is present â" and not for the reasons you might assume.
[...]
Psychologists from the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Italy conducted experiments on the Milan metro to see who, if anyone, might offer their seat to a pregnant passenger.
The kicker? Sometimes Batman was there â" or at least, another experimenter dressed as him. The researchers were checking if people were more likely to give up their seat in the presence of the caped crusader.
And sure enough, there did seem to be a correlation. In 138 different experiments, somebody offered their seat to an experimenter wearing a hidden prosthetic belly 67.21 percent of the time in the presence of Batman.
That's a lot more often than times the superhero wasn't around â" in those cases, a passenger offered a seat just 37.66 percent of the time.
[...]
"Interestingly, among those who left their spot in the experimental condition, nobody directly associated their gesture with the presence of Batman, and 14 (43.75 percent) reported that they did not see Batman at all."
The article goes on to speculate about what is causing people to be more generous.
So I'm all for evidence-based medicine as a starting point, but when you realize it isn't behaving normally, you should adjust accordingly.
The thing about adopting evidence-based policy is that you also need to review and if necessary change policy when more evidence becomes available. The kind of situation you're describing would surely qualify.
Video games are on average horrible for training fine motor control; they are good for fast twitch hand eye coordination, within a very small envelope, and that's about it.
How on earth can you "exhaustively" deidentify millions of chat logs that could contain literally any personal details, and presumably all without OpenAI's own employees also sifting through personal information in exactly the way they're claiming would be bad if others did it?
and peppered the public with constant lies.
That skill proved useful in his later career.
For sure. And that's why I think it's important to distinguish harm caused despite good intentions and reasonable practices being followed from harm caused because someone did not follow reasonable practices or actively chose to cut corners.
Just my personal opinion, but given the track record in this particular industry, I think there should be demonstrable intent by decision-makers to follow good practices, not merely a lack of evidence of intent to circumvent or cut corners. This is expected in other regulated industries, compliance failures are a big deal, and for good reason. I see no reason why similar standards could not be imposed on those developing and operating autonomous vehicles, and every reason they should be given the inherent risks involved.
Maybe this will be an area where the US simply gets left behind because of the pro-car and litigious culture that seems to dominate discussions there.
Reading online discussions about driving -- admittedly a hazardous pastime if you want any facts to inform a debate -- you routinely see people from the US casually defending practices that are literally illegal and socially shunned in much of the world because they're so obviously dangerous. Combine that with the insanely oversized vehicles that a lot of drivers in the US apparently want to have and the car-centric environments that make alternative ways of getting around much less common and much less available, and that's how you get accident stats that are already far worse than much of the developed world.
But the people who will defend taking a hand off the wheel to pick up their can of drink while chatting with their partner on a call home all while driving their truck at 30mph down a narrow road full of parked cars past a school bus with kids getting out are probably going to object to being told their driving is objectively awful and far more likely to cause a death than the new self-driving technologies we're discussing here. You just don't see that kind of hubris, at least not to anything like the same degree, in most other places, so we might see more acceptance of self-driving vehicles elsewhere too.
Mathematicians stand on each other's shoulders. -- Gauss
