My point is everything about that sentence could be wrong.

Again Amazon will replace ALL of their warehouse workers as soon as it is feasible. So far they have only been able to replace some of them.

The article says this: "Various sources indicate that a single Am9080 processor cost AMD only 50 cents to make (100 per wafer), yet it could sell them to military customers for $700 each." It however does not name "various sources". My best guess is the $0.50 does not include any capital costs and only certain operational costs.

Robots have been coming for decades. And Amazon is one company that will replace all their warehouse workers with robots at the first sign that is feasible. Amazon, of all companies, knows the limits of robots in automation as they have been trying to create fully automated warehouses for decades.

Or worse, because it is on the Internet, it must be true. I had a friend whose entire argument that some conspiracy theory was true because multiple people posted things on websites. I countered that I could set up a website to detail how that friend murdered a homeless person one summer.

And you missed the point. You could easily verify the cases exist. AI cited cases do not exist. You could subsequently argue to the court that the cases do not support the opposition's arguments.

More than likely, the cost of any alternative is now cost prohibitive as AI is buying out those as well.

You would be surprised. Again Micron is making high bandwidth memory for AI instead of consumer DRAM. They have already announced this.

Again you would be surprised by the lack of logistics for some of these data centers. And no one is not saying it does not require that level of planning. What we are saying is some of these data centers are being built on hopes and dreams as the foundation.

Did you? The first assumption is paralegals were fired. How about the assertion that having or not having a paralegal makes no difference if the lawyer does no verification of something the lawyer is submitting to a court. Regardless of who wrote the filing, the lawyer submitting the filing is responsible for the contents.

1) I doubt AI is smart enough to do that. 2) Verifying the case exists is trivially easy as the citation explicitly tells everyone how to find the case. The difficulty is in locating cases that are relevant to the legal issue.

1) So your advice is to only hire lawyers from large law firms? Lawyers with a solo practice may not have a paralegal. 2) A

Again small one lawyer firms exist so what you are saying is untrue. They should use paralegals to lighten their work load, but that does not mean they must always use a paralegal.

Again I know of one person firms that do not always use a paralegal.

You wrote above: "I can easily see a lawyer order their paralegals to fact check their reports" You just contradicted what you wrote.

You literally wrote: "Did they fire their paralegals? Because that would explain why they still have issues. I can easily see a lawyer order their paralegals to fact check their reports ". Do you not remember what you wrote?

You do realize that only applies to routers in inventory, not every single router forever. Every model of router will need to be "authorized" to be imported from now on.

Not from what I can see. NVidia is getting tons of orders for processors. Also the RAM shortage is because AI datacenters are buying all available memory and convincing the RAM foundries to make as much high bandwidth AI server memory as possible. When the bubble bursts, will these companies be left with orders no one wants. For example, Micron has stopped selling consumer memory in order to make HBM3E which is not consumer RAM sticks. Maybe Micron could sell some of that RAM to non AI datacenters, but the vast majority of those datacenters use ECC DDR memory as it is reliable.

Again, some data centers are being built without plans for cooling, power, etc. It is as if they just expect the surrounding area just to build all of that for them.

Unfortunately for lawyers, they are in a field where their opposition checks their work. From what I understand the most difficult part is finding the relevant case or law. If a lawyer cites [court case] or [law], the opposition can quickly check it. It is almost an NP problem.

1) Why do you assume paralegals had anything to do with it? If a lawyer is using AI to write their briefs without checking anything before submitting them to courts, it is most likely they do not have paralegals to do that or they were never going to give that work to a paralegal.

2) No matter how the works is produced, the lawyer who submits the filing under their own name is responsible for making sure the filing is correct. In one of the AI cases I remember, the lawyer who submitted the filing was sanctioned just like he lawyer who admitted he used AI to write the filing.