Only comparing one democracy (at time of writing ) and up to a few years ago it would indeed have been bonkers. Today he's using the playbook of China (and Russia and North Korea, plus various historic European regimes) to achieve his "aims". He seems to use 1984 and Animal Farm as instruction books as opposed to cautionary tales.

"One-man show, top-down authoritarian style, interfere in the market."

Watch out, you'll get a visit from the masked Imperial Trump Guard with criticisms like that. Oh, you're talking about Chyna. Sorry.

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

And then all the other contributors. I first installed it 31 years ago, probably on a DX-something-slow processor PC. Slackware something or other. Currently mainly use flavours of Ubuntu on VIM4 SBC computers and in Vagrant (on a Mac, because the year of the Linux desktop was/will be too late for me). Here's to the next 34 years.

Her government sold off the resource. In order to make short-term profit. To enable tax cuts for middle-class. In order to cement her party in power. Without making any investments in the future. Yes, I'll blame her for it. She, with Ronny, gave the world Neo-liberalism and other parties have run with it.

After she'd sold Water, the parties had nothing to do with building reservoirs etc - it was a corporate decision from then on driven by profit. Until this year, when a Labour government stepped in to build reservoirs: https://www.gov.uk/government/...

So once again, yes I will blame Thatcher. She did irreparable damage to the country I once called home and enabled much of the later damage that her colleagues got away with.

Privatise a public good, reap the rewards. She (Mrs Thatcher) sold off the family silver for short-term gain (and after she'd hamstrung the old water authorities by denying them access to loans for infrastructure). Now a bunch of water companies "compete" to make the most profit, by raising bills and reducing investment. Yay. Another bit of right-wing nonsense the country gets to enjoy.

what kind of behavior would demonstrate that LLMs did have understanding?

An LLM would need to act like an understander -- the essence of the Turing Test. Exactly what that means is a complex question. And it's a necessary but not sufficient condition. But we can easily provide counterexamples where the LLM is clearly not an understander. Like this from the paper:

When prompted with the CoT prefix, the modern LLM Gemini responded: âoeThe United States was established in 1776. 1776 is divisible by 4, but itâ(TM)s not a century year, so itâ(TM)s a leap year. Therefore, the day the US was established was in a normal year.â This response exemplifies a concerning pattern: the model correctly recites the leap year rule and articulates intermediate reasoning steps, yet produces a logically inconsistent conclusion (i.e., asserting 1776 is both a leap year and a normal year).

If scores of deep-fakes of the judge flooded it the Internet.

Hey Internet pedants, that's how you correct someone's spelling. Well played.

That really looks like a list that was generated by AI. Many of those jobs require performing physical tasks, so until they can make generic robots that can perform those tasks, those people will still have jobs.

n/t, just despair.

Will my six-year old Model 3 with FSD, like fully self-drive because of this?

No wait, I don't care; it goes next month to be replaced by a Porsche EV. That's what having an unstable Nazi as a CEO does to potential repeat buyers. Getting the orange one into power and laughing along as he threatens my country with becoming the 51st "state" made sure I sold it as soon as I could.

Can't find any concrete references (too lazy). But I remember many of us (here on Slashdot and other dens of iniquity) laughing at the insanity of the OOXML format when it first emerged. Especially given the pre-existence of ODF.

The Wikipedia page does tell us the number of pages the standard runs to - it's greater than 120.

It also suggests there have only been two major releases of the format and the problems seem to have been baked in from day one.

Moderated Troll? Tough crowd.

And none of that is relevant in the slightest to discussions about "comparative advantage" and why trade can and should (in an ideal world) be beneficial to both parties, including consumers as a well as corporations. Nor why phones are made in China.

Note that Ford rapidly built factories around the world shortly after getting the assembly line concept working for him.