What part of the statement has turned you into a rifle wielding revolutionary? That I run 3 companies? That I have people working for me? That a business I run operates 24x7x52 and people work in shifts, including weekends and because of that some people work 4 days instead of 5? Which shift you personally have a problem with, the morning one, the day one or the night one? We need explanations as to how simple statements turn someone into a violent maniac. Posting from my backup account, since can no longer make new comments from the main one.

Not the way laws in most countries are written. Typically the airline is responsible for transporting you back if they didnâ(TM)t validate your identity prior to departure.

News to me. Here in Denmark we seem to be doing quite well.

Eggs are trivially easy to come by, too.

Me too. But I drive an etron GT - which for my money (obviously, since I paid for it) has the best sound of any EV.

Are we trying to stir the pot, so-called editors?

In any case, the “value” of bitcoin is and will always be arbitrary. The fact that you can make money from it, and the fact that some people have made a LOT of money from it, is no proof of value; fundamentally, it’s no different from gambling or a Ponzi scheme.

There may well still be plenty of money to be made on the coin. That’s fine, go nuts. I’ll keep my money in something with potentially less upside but definitely less downside risk.

Setting aside everything else in the story, I’d like to talk about the better applicants bit.

Assuming that’s true, it’s not a systemic advantage of a 32 hour work week. Might be good for them as first-movers, but if everybody were on 32 hour weeks, it should be clear that something less than 100% of the organizations in the world can have “better” applicants. All that really says is the best people have more optionality, but when discussing the merits of the shorter week at large, that one should be discounted, it seems.

While I agree that the value has not been proven, a company that waits until value has been proven will never win the market. Business is risk, and taking the right risks is key to generating shareholder value.

That said, I am by no means convinced that most companies are taking the right level of risk with regards to AI - Iâ(TM)m only pointing out the fallacy of that statement in isolation. I agree that most are overplaying it.

In America, that might be the case. Not in Northern Europe, as indicated elsewhere in the thread.

Also note that Nordic countries already have strong central IAM mechanisms - every resident has a national ID, provisioned by the banks but linked to a central authority, so we do have mechanisms in place for ensuring that an adult at least has to be involved. While the scenario you indicated COULD happen, it’s far less likely here if social media choose to leverage those mechanisms.

Since it also says that you posted it, did you really need to thank yourself for it too?

While I don’t disagree with your point about celebrity endorsements, I think it would be fair to highlight that although she indicated for whom she would vote, she abstained from encouraging people to do the same. She literally wrote that people should do their own research and vote - e.g. not just take her endorsement.

I think it’s a perfectly fair endorsement and use of her platform, and could even wish she’d been more outspoken about Trump.

I think you ought to read up on how things work here in the Nordics - or at least read the linked article - before posting your brilliant ideas of a centralized ID mechanism.

If you judge Apple, of all companies, to have a poor track record on security and privacy, then I respectfully suggest you stop using any digital devices. Clearly nothing short of total disconnection will suffice!

This kind of answer is why I still come to this site. +1 if I could have!

Yeah, I’m trying very hard not to picture what innovations Apple may be doing up his ass either.

Agreed. They’ve been in my Audis for 15 years, and the one American car (Tesla) thought I bought in that time period also had the feature, albeit that one had a phantom braking problem that the Audis did not, and I never felt quite confident in its ability to stop me in time to prevent an accident the way I did with the German cars. No real data, just feel of the system while driving.

I find that the latest Audi is a little overly aggressive when parking near a bush - it’s come on and slammed me to a halt almost a dozen times over the past two years while I was parking but still a solid 10cm from any impact, but obviously at parking speeds the words “slam to a halt” are a little overly dramatic. But overall, I’m a huge fan of these systems, and the data shows they help inattentive drivers on the highway.