"The chances of someone being born with excellent skills is equal everywhere"

This is a nice rhetorical assertion, and one I'd like to agree with, but it's (unfortunately, for both the skilled and those in less advanced areas) provably false.

Skill directly correlates to IQ at a population level. The IQ of European-native peoples, Chinese, Japanese, and Jewish peoples is in the 100-105 range average. Africa, India, and the Middle East (to a lesser degree)? Not true at all. A full SD or more different. You've got a huge problem with inbreeding throughout India and the Middle East, for instance. This means that your average person is not going to have the same chance of being "born with excellent skills".

Of course, this is also not without discounting things like upbringing and environment, and it undoubtedly has some play in the matter.

As for this policy, it has absolutely nothing to do with letting the best and brightest immigrate. It's clearly reactionary due to unfettered refugees and other unskilled immigrants who can't speak the language, don't want to speak the language, and bring obscene levels of crime to what would otherwise be an idyllic socialist utopia.

In what ways do you find it superior?

For me, Grok has been pretty consistent at making some pretty wild code recommendations and not following specifications.

It's not like Gemini, which will get stuck implementing things and then get into a histrionic panic loop, but it's not nearly as good as gpt5.1 in implementing correct, complete code per specification.

It's over.

Is something like YouTube, except when they show a clip from something, or a slide, or anything, I can click on that and it opens in a new tab as the video continues to play. That would be nice.

My memories of college include feeling lucky if I had enough quarters to do laundry!

Bob? Is that Seymore's brother?

The only defense against a bad AI is a good AI. There has always been an arms race between the hackers and the security consultants; AI just accelerates the pace. Ultimately, we will have to rely on AI to defend us from AI. Better get to training those paranoia AIs, boys... Aren't we already at the point that we need to use an AI to detect AI-generated content?

Like, would you consider your girlfriend having 38% fewer hallucinations to be a big win? (I once had a girlfriend call me up while she was experiencing delirium tremens and describe to me how demons were raping her mom. I told her she was hallucinating. She insisted it was real, she could see it!)

That's not actually the flex you think it is...

l think this comment wins the thread.

The time has come for a European University CSE department group to reverse-engineer HDMI 2.1 and publish a compatible implementation on Github.

There's a solid history of this category of work going back 30 years.

They have certain legal protections for compatibility and public interest work.

This 1990's licensing model is antiquated and obsolete.

IEEE and ITU have abdicated their responsibility so sombody like Valve needs to do for transport spec what AV1 did for codecs and linux did for operating systems.

"A rising tide lifts all boats" is common among free marketeers and communists but opposed by fascists.

I will not argue whether or not NPR is "liberal" or "democrat" or whatever. I will concede your point that it is NOT conservative; however, I know nobody who listens to NPR, not even myself (which is why I will not argue your assertion there).

Newspapers are, or at least used to be, "big", but your assertion falls flat on its face there. One example is that The Washington Post, a very major newspaper, was purchased semi-recently by a conservative. Numerous other newspapers are also owned by conservatives. Your point falls flat here.

Wire services are essentially fact repeaters and in fact, appear to have a conservative bias to the facts that they look at and reveal. It is other news organizations that do the editorializing.

Ultimately, you will have to provide a much more coherent argument if you would like anyone to listen to you assertions.

Have a nice day. :)

> Is there a huge difference between a criminal organization and a multinational corporation?

Yes, huge difference.

The common-law criminals running corporations get statutory protection from liability for the crimes they commit under corporate letterhead.

A regular mafia has individual liability.

cable dated December 9 sent to all U.S. diplomatic posts said that typography shapes the professionalism of an official document and Calibri is informal compared to serif typefaces

What a dick - next he'll be saying US Diplomatic posts should not be written in red. Wtf?

Message > Medium FTW.

I can only speak from my viewpoint in Eugene, Oregon area, but two of the three you name are each the third most expensive in their respective areas.

Half the stores in the area were closed in the Kroger/Albersons/Safeway merger. There is now no competition between them in any neighborhood. You get one or the other.

ATT owns all communication infrastructure in Oregon (going back to the Ma Bell break-up and the acquisition of some Internet backbone), they license to Verizon, who sell licenses to anyone else. T-Mobile has a nice pre-pay plan, but their regular service wasn't cheaper, you just got a better free phone.

There is one tower where I live, it belongs to Verizon. There is one cable company (under many names, but all are equal to Comcast, who leases hanging wire space from ATT, or WiFi/Satellite from Verizon) and it's not cheap.

And before someone tries to blame the big corps here, Oregon as a State issues all these exclusive licenses, and is 95 percent Democrat and has been since 1982.

Mergers are never for the consumer.

Unless they own stock.