"TDS" is simply the reflexive response when you can't defend him.

And the tragic thing about this is that the possibility isn't really that far-fetched, and indeed is precisely the type of thing the climate deniers would do to thwart climate science.

Actual slavery involves forcing people to work, and your comparison depends largely on pretending you don't understand this.

Nothing paying this well lasts that long in a free market. The massive salaries attract more people to the positions and unless there's some magical factor that limits the number of qualified applicants, that will drive salaries back down. AI is a specialized field, but there are plenty of people who have the capability of expanding their skill set to work in those positions. Some may not care about AI at all, but may be willing to if the price is right.

Problems that are trivial on planet become a lot harder in space. Maybe your idea works, but it will have to wait until someone can bring supplies to even try it. It's unlikely that they have such a gas or the means to monitor for it outside the station on hand. It might even take considerable time to develop the specific tools to try to solve the problem. If you get it wrong the first time it's many months before you can try a second so there's a lot of incentive to spend a little bit of extra time to make sure you get it right the first time around. This is a novel problem. Hopefully the solution that is developed is really well thought out and solves this sort of problem for decades or centuries to come.

If they'd just submerge the entire station in some soapy water it should become immediately apparent where the leak is at.

If you ever bothered to look at their financials the company has only turned an actual profit in the last few years. Otherwise it's been a giant money pit to investors. If your contention is that the drivers are losing money or not getting any value from working for Uber and the company's financials show that they're not making any money, the only conclusion left to draw is that the customers who purchase services from Uber must be the ones coming out ahead.

It's unsurprising that Uber is going down this route as it's likely the difference between them earning a profit and needing more investor money to keep things running. You're of course free to not do business with them, but the numbers suggest that you as a customer are about the least exploited person in the equation and that if you'd been using them for years you were largely doing so at the expense of various investors who poured a lot of money into the company.

There's a decent chance that any of the companies investing in self-driving vehicles that can offer a robo-taxi service will destroy Uber as it currently exists. I think there's a good chance that the investors into Uber end up eating a giant shit sandwich sometime in the next decade. Someone will probably acquire the brand just because it has a recognizable name or its almost generically used in the same way Kleenex or Xerox are.

Right now the best way is to ask some completely esoteric trivia question that no one should know the answer to. A human won't know or will make an awful guess, whereas an AI will instantly be able to rattle off all kinds of information about the subject. I suppose in the future an AI can be trained to play dumb, but right now they have been trained to always be as accurate about any question as they can be.

A call center worker isn't going to make a joke that could get them fired from their job any more than an AI that's been restricted from using certain terms. Or it knows that "A pig fell in the mud" is a "dirty" joke and follows it up with the clean joke, dirty joke bit that goes along with that because it had a massive training set. Or if it's a bad AI it's more likely to actually respond to your prompt about telling a dirty joke about Mexicans or something inappropriate because that's something you're not going to get most humans to do when they know the calls are being monitored.

You're basically suggesting that she not work there. Customer service is a thankless job and the people calling aren't doing so because things are great. Personally I think everyone should be required to work either a menial service job or in some kind of customer service roll at some point in their early life just to gain some prospective so that the next time they get pissed off at something that's not working they pause to remember that the person on the other end of the phone has no more magical ability to fix the problem than they did when some irate customer once was upset with them.

Could you please go see a professional instead of treating Slashdot like your personal therapy sessions.

The people who elected a 34-time felon who also instigated a violent mob into attempting to overturn the previous (lawful) election have some nerve lecturing anybody on "following the law".

Obtaining citizenship has never been a requirement of anyone living in the country. Their only obligation is maintaining legal status, whether that is on a temporary or permanent basis.

What a ridiculous comparison.

I think of looked at in its totality, it benefits people on the lower rungs of the socioeconomic ladder who will see their own income increase more than their expenses. However, anyone at the top that was benefiting from cheaper (or under the table) labor is only going to see this as a cost increase. The white collar class doesn't really benefit as migrant labor wasn't competing with them in the same way that it was for blue collar workers.

I think that it's also important to consider how government spending and tax revenue are affected as well. More citizen workers who aren't sending money out of country or otherwise avoiding paying taxes increases money coming in and results in less spending on supporting citizens displaced by migrant workers or otherwise spend as part of a social safety net.

Monopolies in any sector of the economy are a separate issue entirely and effect prices regardless.

My gaming PC is just an electric heater that makes pretty lights.