I hate to break it to you guys.

But it's getting harder to distinguish between podslop and human-produced podcasts.

For example, I've been actively listening to a technology podcast summarizing science and technology articles found in someone's Google Notebook LM. The owner of the notebook must have added customizations to give more personality to the male and female voices, but the summaries are interesting and listenable.

After I realized that it was podslop, I stopped listening to these podcasts, but I had to admit that I enjoyed the episodes that I had listened to, and it introduced me to lots of concepts and innovations I had never been exposed to (I did have to move past the gushing about the Notebook owner's wisdom in choosing this article to discuss).

Is that really true? Many of the layoffs I've seen over the past year have been legitimately "removing layers", purging loads of fat in middle management.

Companies constantly go through cycles where they stretch to a very vertical structure with a manager for every three employees (exaggerating, but only slightly), and then there's the periodic flattening where they prune it out.

Hey here is a simple idea... Why not do a toll? You know something simple that they do with trucks. For what I hate about this tax is what happens when you are outside of the country?

I hate crap like this, and this is my explanation.

Large companies are not innovative, large companies suck little companies dry. Compare the dot com bubble with the AI bubble. In the dot com bubble we had thousands of small companies riding the wave. Of course a very large chunk of them went under. In the AI bubble we have a few big companies and that's it. How is that better for innovation? The only really new company is Open AI. Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, Facebook are all borg companies where innovation goes to die.

Steve Jobs was never afraid to kill off cash cows if something more innovative comes along. The companies I mentioned are not willing. Chinese companies have figured out how to run these models on less hardware. Yet American companies keep talking billions upon billions. They do so so that no little company would ever challenge them.

Take for example Musk and Optimus vs Unitree Robots. Unitree has a video where it shows a robot that can be knocked down and it gets up without problems. Musk to counter shows a robot with power lines that can do a simple kata. GIVE ME A BREAK! This is the best American engineering can do?

So to critique European innovation is yet another tactic by American "innovation" companies to try and make things go their way. BTW what the article fails to mention is that labor costs quite a bit more in America, than Europe. I am talking about high tech labor.

Exactly. No idea why people confuse this.

Not really. They all demand certain hooks that will give up your identity. For if they allowed truly anonymous behaviour I could visit twitter without an account. Try visiting and seeing content on Facebook or Twitter without an account. Reddit will allow it for the most part, but Instagram nags you. The others just say log in to see this content.

DUDE you nailed it! If social media really cared they would have done this already. But they realize it will lead to less clicks, less addictions.

How less addictions? Because kids will have to find other means to amuse themselves. You know like maybe going outside? Doing sports? Having a hobby? There have been quite a few studies that have indicated social media at such a young age is not good for the development of the mind. Once you are older it is less problematic.

No this is not a government issued license to allow you to speak. Children can continue to speak. They can continue to interact on the Internet. However... people drive at either 16 or 18. People are considered adults at 18. People can legally drink from 16 to 21 depending on the country. The list goes on there are plenty of restrictions and they make sense. Free speech is not absolute. Otherwise if you really believe it you would not be a paranoid anonymous coward. You would put your money where your mouth is.

Why are you classified as a troll? You asked the right question. When I read the headline;

"Adjusting for this bias revealed that the summer of 2023 was about 2.3 C above pre-industrial temperatures from this period. "

I read BS. Let me explain it this way. Imagine you do statistical sampling. It relies on the fact that data follows a Gaussian curve. The problem is that if your data is incomplete, LIKE SAID IN THE ARTICLE, then you can't do statistical adjustment. Of course it has not stopped the statisticians making things up, but it still does not make it right.

What makes this bias adjustment worse is that we are considered to have a completely out of whack value. Since we are not following the gaussian curve since we are out of whack it means the data is useless.

UNLESS and here is where it bugs me to no end, we want to make the assertion that climate change is out of control and a statistical outlier. Guess which one folks are following. Yeah... This is why I am skeptical, and why it surprises me that you are marked as a troll.

But here is the problem even as a first pass it is bad as a first pass. Let's do a first pass and I get somebody who has rigged the paper to pass through the system. If we see a B or even an A and assume the system assignment is correct then we have a false negative. Thus if this happens often enough what then? How can you trust a system that has that? You have to read each and every one of the papers, which puts us right back in square one.

If you're that wealthy, you're sending your kid to Yale to meet future employees (the smart, hard-working, non-legacy students) and future partners (the rich, legacy students of arbitrary skill).

Great idea; no notes.