But you don't need to trust LLMs, when you can verify their work. It's no different than when humans do math. We make mistakes, too.

The 70% figure is a misstatement. 70% of the guns Mexico's government submits to the USA for tracing are successfully traced to the USA.
Trick is, Mexico only submits a fraction of the guns they collect. They don't submit weapons they trace to their own forces and store, weapons they know are from elsewhere, like the full auto AK-47 and 74 rifles with Russian and similar stampings, stuff obviously made in China or South America.
The whole paragraph citing the 70% figure.
"According to [U.S.] Justice Department figures, 94,000 weapons were recovered from Mexican drug cartels in the five years between 2006 and 2011, of which 64,000 -- 70 percent, according to Jim Moran -- come from the United States."[26] The percentages pertaining to the origin of weapons confiscated from organized crime and drug cartels may not be accurately reported. Said numbers represent only firearms Mexican authorities asked the US to trace (7,200 firearms) and that the ATF was able to trace (4,000 on file, of which 3,480 from US). US ATF Mexico City Office informed Mexican authorities ATF had eTrace data only on firearms made in or imported into the US and told them not to submit firearms that lacked US maker or US importer marks as required by US law. The guns submitted for tracing were only firearms that appeared to be US origin. The remaining guns were not submitted for tracing, or were not able to be traced. "In fact, the 3,480 guns positively traced to the United States equals less than 12 percent of the total arms seized in Mexico in 2008 and less than 48 percent of all those submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF for tracing. This means that almost 90 percent of the guns seized in Mexico in 2008 were not traced back to the United States."

Firearms confiscated: 94,000
Submitted for trace: 7,200, 7.7%
Successfully traced to the USA: 3,480. 48% of 7,200, 3.7% of the 94,000 collected.
That is far less than 70%, to the point that saying 70% is in the realm of deliberate misinformation.
All this indicates is that the Mexican government has a good idea of what weapons came from the USA. High quality handguns, semi auto weapons, firearms with serial numbers.
They don't bother with weapons obviously manufactured without serial numbers or that they knew were made elsewhere, like the full auto AK series.

Actually, the plastic zip gun is the best somebody can do with a relatively cheap plastic or resin type printer.

Using industrial metal printers, like what Boeing and other airline manufacturers are using to make select parts, it is possible to print a fully functional handgun. I remember reading an article where they printed and tested a 1911 using one. All metal parts.

That said, not a lot of us are running around with a $100k and up printer, so it isn't that much of a factor, at least for now. The noble gas requirements for good 3D metal printing is always going to be a barrier (at least for the next 100 years or so).

Ok, the proposed law is even more about thought control than just imposing a censorship regime on the printer:

"It would also make it a crime to possess or share the digital design files used to produce 3D printed firearms unless the individual has appropriate authorization."

In other words, it would defacto impose a gun manufacturing license requirement on anyone who even wants to have a cad file for a firearm.

So, some questions (not having read the actual text of the law) - would this then be applicable to a digitized schematic drawing of a firearm with the correct dimensions - since, theoretically, that's what you'd need to create a frame/receiver in many cases.

I guess you'd then need to restrict access to calipers, in case someone decided to measure up and publish these evil dimensions...

Indeed. Mexico has far more stringent gun laws than the USA, has only 1 legal gun store (as of last time I checked), ownership of military calibers is forbidden (so no 9mm or 5.56 for the people). Cartels still have huge amounts of firearms, including machine guns. While US firearms are popular for handguns and niche weapons, lots are running around with actual AK line weapons (full auto/select fire), and the police have found the cartels to be manufacturing weapons as well.

You might want to actually research this before you make the claim, as it is you who is "100% incorrect."

ATF webpage on Privately Made Firearms.

While there's obviously more to this, I can legally make a firearm myself, using a 3D printer as desired and technically feasible, so long as there's enough metal in it to trigger a metal detector (that's the Gun Control Act detectable requirement). Generally a metal barrel and chamber is more than enough for this.

A firearm is a machine made up of discreet parts, many of which can either be sourced online without restriction in the United States (barrels, springs, slides, non-receiver frame, stock), or manufactured in a basic home workshop (basically just the receiver).

Other countries ban all firearm parts, or critical parts like barrels. The US has a particular regime that only recognizes the receiver as the actual "firearm" at a federal level. I'm not up on the current ins and outs of state laws, but to the best of my knowledge, you can basically buy and sell everything aside from the receiver without a federal firearms license in the USA.

There's a whole subculture of gun modders who have taken to 3d printing like ducks to water, who've pushed the boundaries of what is possible with the various printing filaments, post-processing, etc., and have generated a number of remixed open gun designs.

The only way to fully comply with a law that forces the printer to be a censor, is basically to have it phone home every time you want to slice and print a design. This is the antithesis of free (libre) 3d printing, and requires that someone pay for the censorship infrastructure, and someone to maintain the database of what is, and what isn't allowable to print.

Once a censorship infrastructure is in place, what then stops a politician to then ban "hacking tools", such as customized wrenches to open certain types of proprietary equipment, or ban "infringing content" such as replacement cartridge shells for a Super Nintendo system?

Not to mention that CAD files aren't used for 3D printing. 3D printing needs far more detailed instructions than CAD files provide, though they can be used as a starting point.

It might also run into 1st amendment issues. I could see a court even considering the 2nd for it.

Odds are that it either didn't have anything to do with being in space, or the doctors and scientists in a position to address the issue have or will get access, even if in barely anonymized form.
A bunch of IT nerds are not in the need to know.

I think that the complaints of the Chinese are perfectly valid, especially if they applied the rule retroactively. That means he ate penalties for action that were legal at the time. The US constitution and many legal systems explicitly ban this.
Also, rules should stay the same during a tournament short of either a crazy game ruining exploit or serious safety problem. Fix the rule between tournaments.

If the amount of time spent at stops is just 20%, then cutting them in half would only save at most 10%. I don't see this as a good idea at all, considering that some people just cannot walk so far so easily.

Some may remember that Matthew McConaughey also licensed his voice to Eleven Labs for AI usage.

At the time, I was a little perplexed, but then I figured it must have been an exclusive license. Nothing can stop some clever AI from faking your voice. But if a company has exclusive rights to it, not only do you have detailed accounting (and likely, veto power) over when and where it is used, but if someone is using it in an unauthorized, unlicensed way, the company can file the lawsuits for you. You and your attorneys don't have to do it on your own.

I reckon it's hard to preserve the "commercial appeal" of a game you could play on a desert island with a bunch of rocks.

OK, but in this case, he verified the result with another, non-AI tool.

I'm retired USAF - I have sent stuff to DRMO (DoD's recycling program at the time, they've renamed it since) that had only been out of the box for inventorying purposes because the program that was supposed to have gone live 3 years ago still hadn't done so, so they refreshed the equipment for it, which I fully expected to go to DRMO in its own time as well, still unused.
Explaining the quantity: Why would an office need 240 phones for 80 employees? Even if one needed spares, that might be 10 or so. Especially if the ability to order more was trivial.
Same person who ordered them is the same person who took them to the pawn shop: You're missing that this is (allegedly) a criminal act. Christopher Southerland, by the evidence, ordered the phones shipped directly to his residence, then sold them to a pawn shop nearby his home. Records at the pawn shop identified him as the seller, along with an employee of the pawn shop being told to sell them only "as parts".
How old the devices were: They were likely sold within days or weeks of receipt, basically brand new.
On the orders: It happened over a 5 month period - January to May of 2023. You're right, it probably wasn't a single order, and accounting didn't have some sort of sanity checker that would alert to more cell phones being ordered in a short period than an office has staff.