Rather than warning journalists that their phones may be compromised, why doesn't Apple instead patch the vulnerabilities so the phones won't be infected in the first place!?!?

Or they could gradually phase out gas stations so there'd be no way to fill your tank. That way they wouldn't have to take your car away. You could have all the ICE cars you want; you just wouldn't be able to put gas in them!

My point was that one should criticize the articles themselves, not the fact that a computer rather than a human wrote them. Besides, I think the passage you quoted was just an observation that while many people might have basketballs and baseballs around the house, fewer people may have volleyballs, potentially meaning more effort may have to be made to get into the sport.

If the articles are informative, well-written, and enjoyable to read, what does it matter if they were written by a human, a computer, or a cat?

Are they filed under penalty of perjury? I don't think so.

Anyone else old enough to remember the early internet days when there was concern that objectionable or malicious material or software might enter a person's home through the internet and so people demanded some sort of filtering by ISPs, OS and browser developers, etc.? Technically minded people jokingly suggested extending the TCP/IP protocol to include an "evil bit" in the TCP header which indicates that a packet of data contains something undesirable. Criminals and other bad actors would set this evil bit in any "bad" material they send so filtering systems can use this to keep people out of harm's way. It sounds like this idea might need to be revived for AI.

Sure you can. It's just that in addition to not being able to vote, the "undesirables" would also have to pay a fine.

It sounds like a really big concession on the part of the writers to let their works be used to train AI, but it is probably a pragmatic decision based on the fact that it would be all but impossible to know whether or not one's works were used in training AI systems. The union probably realized it would be impossible to verify that studios or others were not doing this, so they made it a concession to get other things in return.

I'm afraid they lost me after their "musical" episode.

As a previous poster commented, this bridge was on private property so the state couldn't have put up barriers or signs.

This is demonstrably false as many states simply didn't lock down in the way you describe. Yes, some of those states did suffer higher death rates initially (primarily in nursing homes, where such deaths were likely to have occurred anyway), but the other states quickly caught up.

Why couldn't the city just impose speed limits on them?

Yeah, and I'm an incredibly good looking person. A solid 10. Handsome face with beautiful, sensitive eyes and a solid square jaw, and a totally ripped body: Michelangelo could not have carved a more beautiful specimen. But only if you don't look.

I doubt this treatment, if it ever became available, would help you. A dentist would still need to drill out all the decayed tooth before applying stem cells to regrow the tooth. Since it is generally the drilling that is most bothersome to people, I'm afraid this wouldn't translate to any better experiences at the dentist.

But should we be glad of that? It was partly as a result of cheap air travel that people moved far away from their extended families. It's no big deal to move from one coast to another when you can take the kids to visit grandma for $300 return. In the old days, people tended to not move so far away and extended families were often within easy driving distance. But during the decades of cheap air travel, families scattered all over the continent. Now that families are so far flung, the door will be slammed shut. That is not a good thing.