"Because they can engineer them to achieve desired goals."

Except they "sort of" achieve those goals. They still haven't been able to engineer out the hallucinations yet which demonstrates that no, they don't have a complete handle on whats going on.

... how these things work? There seems to me a knowledge gap between the low level actual software implementation of the artificial neurons and the high level conceptual ideas of what the networks/models should be doing.

Researchers seemed to have copied a simplified version of what was earlier ideas of how the brain works (we know now it doesn't use back propagation) and then just applied a suck-it-and-see approach to improving these ANNs without really knowing how they do what they do. Or maybe I'm wrong, dunno.

"This is no need to involve government incompetence"

So governments have nothing to do with road regulations then?

Very unlikely this is going to be go-anywhere like a real taxi. It will almost certainly be geofenced and limited to certain roads where it can't get stuck. European streets are often much narrower than US ones and its quite possible for a 2 way street to only have room for a single vehicle at a time with bad parking.

So instead of having 50-70 people in a single bus or 1000 in a metro train they'll have 1-4 people in a large van sized vehicle. How exactly is that sustainable? This is just more greenwash BS from a company that really should know better by now.

Where did I say I was expecting similar performance? But Python is slow even for an interpreted language especially given its usually compiled to bytecode first. I would expect similar performance to Java , not run at approx 1/100th the speed of compiled C!

They need to really speed it up because core python is dog slow. Right now it cannot be used for any CPU bound applications where execution time matters unless its just acting as a simple wrapper script to call embedded C code.

Lay off the weed mate, it's not doing your brain any favours.

"Most have zero interest in them at all. "

And what? Most men have zero interest into going into professional childcare. Whats that got to do with teaching? Do you actually read a post before replying to it or will any do so you can offload your POV?

Non sequitur. I'm saying you can't learn to code properly in a game, I said nothing about not being able to teach it at all.

"and that we can't teach."

Sure some can. The ability to teach is completely orthogonal to being able to program or any other STEM subject. Otherwise all schools and unis could teach would be liberal arts.

Not sure how learning trig etc in maths relates at all to learning to code in a game. Writing a game is not the same as using one

Like a lot of academic subjects, programming can be gamified up to a point, but eventually you have to just sit down and learn stuff properly, practice writing real code, experiment and learn for yourself what certain data and code structures can and can't do, the gotchas, the edge cases etc etc. eg You're not going to learn the use cases and difference of an array, a list and a hash playing with blocks on screen. Ditto the pros and cons of various sorting algorithms. When it comes down to it , real coding is hard despite what various shills promoting their courses would have kids believe.

How would HP or an investor arrange a sudden storm? This is the real world, not a Marvel comic.

It's made of aluminium which is toxic to a lot of sea life. Not ideal for a reef. Plus itll be full of fuel, oil and general plastic crap which cant be just left there.