All part of his statistics are bad campaign...

Ask google if investing is a zero sum game - you might be surprised at the AI answer.

You can be certain that UBI, should it ever become a thing, will not give you enough money to do more than meet your basic needs, assuming you don't have medical expenses of any kind ever. It won't give you capital to invest.

Unless you own stock in the company, either directly or through an index fund. I'm pretty sure all the people with an ownership interest in AMZN wouldn't think it a win-win. And I'm not sure where the number came from either - stockholders equity / 8 billion would be around $42 TTM.

Let the seller beware - they agreed to the terms of the contract to sell on Amazon.

Having said that, the reality is that most of the third party sellers wouldn't have ever been noticed as a seller if they weren't on Amazon. Sure, google has a shopping tab, and I've looked there occasionally. But I don't look often. If I'm looking for something really expensive, it might be worth a search to see if I can find a cheaper seller that looks reputable. But for cheap items that aren't even worth going to try to find what aisle they're on in Walmart, I'm not going to do a lot of online marketplace shopping to look for a few more cents off.

TLDR is a slashdot synopsis of the issues. If satisfaction can't be achieved in 10 seconds (via text, AI summary, meme, or other quick sound byte), the younger generation seems to move on hoping for something else to tickle their fancy.

There's nothing like a good well written book. But books by modern authors frequently have many typos or wrong words or other issues. You can't even hire proofreaders or good editors anymore, evidently.

It's tough to read a book a day. I managed that one year - a bit over 88,000 pages. Down to 80,000 pages the year after that. I set my goal at 200 books this year and have achieved that, but haven't stopped. There's such a wide range to choose from today, it's hard to understand people who choose not to read. Challenge your mind. I'm reading some of Mark Hewitt's novels now. He's a far right wing conservative author that lets his bias show on every other page. But I find it worth a read just to see how the far far ultraconservative right thinks.

Mark Twain's comment "A person who won't read has no advantage over one who can't read." is still true today.

Good list. I'd also add the views on the chances of a global war affecting the first world also influence this. If you think it will happen, you might not want to bring kids into it. If you're of the opinion it won't happen, and to a point the fact that it hasn't happened since WWII, then that also reduces the need to have a larger number of children to defend your country or allies.

I'd also add availability of birth control and changing attitudes toward unexpected pregnancy have played a part.

They'd talk faster if they weren't worried about getting sued or fired because someone has thin skin and can't handle facts.

To say nothing of the knowing the by then archaic command and menu structure for a CAD software package off the top of his head. Either that or software really plateaued for a significant amount of time - - which could well be what happens.

I'm pretty sure they had that down pat before AI was ever even a hint of reality. At least for us that grew up with Unix/Linux and weren't gradually anesthetized to the sheer lunacy of windows updates over time...

2001: A Space Odyssey...

"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"

"I'm afraid. I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going."

If anyone at Microsoft thinks putting AI in control is a good idea, they really need to read more science fiction... Although there may be some software authors who take Asimov to heart, I don't think any of them work for Microsoft.

And why were you a part of this project? They needed someone with initials N.K.

If you try hard enough, you can misconstrue anything.

No verse says the earth is at the center of the universe. It is at the center of mankind's universe, though, for now, and probably for millennia to come. The universe wasn't created in six literal days (Gen 1:1 just says in the beginning). It was restored to a habitable state after Lucifer's judgment in six literal days though. Noah's flood destroyed the world he knew and he saved the local wildlife that came to his ark - probably a description of the Black Sea's initial creation. From his perspective, the entire world was wiped out. Adam ended up with one less rib, but genetics wouldn't have changed for his offspring. People might have indeed lived longer in the past - fewer genetic mutations and diseases. Animal terminology is just semantics in a language.

There wasn't anything for science to correct. And St. Augustine was correct - any conflicts are there because we don't understand one or the other fully. The Bible isn't about science anyway. It's a historical document, and presents the history of the Jewish people and the path to Christ and thus, salvation. It gives a bit on creation and a bit on what happens in the future. But the primary focus is on Christ - from prophecy about Him in Adam's time all the way to eternity, and telling His part in the Gen. 1:1 creation.

Go ahead and use the not so constructive words. It's okay in war, and at this point, in politics.

Most English, Math, and first year science courses should be able to be taught at the high school level to adequately prepare for college courses at an upper level. Make the existing AP, Honors, and IB curricula adequate to replace those required courses at the college level. My high school calculus course was better than the equivalent college course, but the calculus teacher at college was the department head and had his own calculus book to sell, so it was hard to test out of 1st year calculus for engineering students there. I managed to test out of 1 semester, but not both. This is just an example.

Note that I wasn't saying that they should start studying the actual course work for the profession, but a large number at least have a direction planned by the time they hit high school. They have at least some idea if college is the direction they are planning on or whether they are going a trade route or retail. If you don't then still taking a course load that would satisfy a year or two of college courses by the time you graduate high school wouldn't be an awful thing. I realize that not all high schools offer AP, Honors or IB curricula, but many do. Also, not every city has a junior college. And yes, many that do already offer the chance to take college courses in high school, but coordination of schedules between high school and college is a challenge.

As far as phones are concerned, I think that banning phones is silly, but also that most all kids need better supervision in when their use is appropriate and when it isn't.

Helping students work through the curriculum as quick as they can would be great if every school district offered it, but logistically it would be really difficult to implement. If it wasn't in place everywhere, moving between school districts would be a nightmare.