When there are billions of dollars on the line, that is going to draw some very, very well-resourced attacks. I don't know if that's what happened here, or if Jaguar's defenses and mitigation plans were just THAT bad. But making a public example this disastrous, of a company that well-known, is like a huge shot in the arm to the extortion industry.

Even if AI saves a lot of labor the people developing the AI have to find a way to monetize it.

For example a mechanical engineer making $150 K / year it's not uncommon to pay maybe $7500 for CATIA.

For a stock trader it's about $30K / year for a Bloomberg terminal.

Or maybe it will be like operating an MRI scanner which is $5 million to buy, and the MRI technologist who operates it makes $88K / year.

Or a mining dumptruck that costs $7M and the driver is paid $80K.

Nobody knows where this ratio will end up for any number of jobs to be impacted by AI.

As opposed to what, the massive magnets and magnetic field in the turbines that these ships use to generate power, and have done for more than 50 years?

I don't know it's anything with the plane, the F35-C first launched from the land-based testing version of the electric catapult back in 2011:

http://defensetech.org/2011/11...

and has been taking off from carriers with steam catapults for over a decade

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

My guess is this was done right after ChatGPT hit and it just didn't occur to them that it might make up citations.

Why? I doubt the lawyer took this risk intentionally or will be doing it again. It sends the message clearly, you are responsible for your legal filings, regardless of the tools you might use.

Uber isn't developing the tech, they're licensing it.

No there wasnt a serious effort to survey every square mile of a bombed city in order to uncover unexploded ordnance, because it would have been a huge huge task at a time when the resource available was focused on feeding the bombed out city dwellers.

They didnt have the tech that we have today, so there are many situations where a bomb didn't go off and buried itself several metres underground with minimal impact damage, or fell inside the crater of another bomb which did explode earlier and thus hide all evidence of there being a second bomb. Millions of bombs were dropped, and cities were bombed again and again.

These things arent sitting on the surface being blatantly obvious, they would have been buried by their own momentum. You would need extremely accurate magnetometers, or ground penetrating radar

We have W+ and Prime and these are probably the main 2 sites I cross-shop these days. They don't overlap entirely; Amazon sells a lot more variety under its own return policies etc, while Walmart is better for things like motor oil that they have locally (if you wanted to go into a Superstore). But there's enough overlap that it's worth cross-shopping, for now.

One does wonder what they are thinking - why would anybody want or tolerate this?

Most ads we are stuck with because we want the media or service that the ads support. Oh, you want to watch two teams of 53 millionaires play football? OK, but 30% of your time will be watching ads.

On a fridge what is the payoff?

Yeah, growing up in the cold war it was a foregone conclusion the commies would always lose because central planning doesn't work. You'd hear the story about a factory overflowing with left shoes and no matching right shoes were being made. I still think there is some truth to it, but China has been on a run for quite a while now. I am skeptical of any narrative in which a key element is them being very stupid.

Something that seems to constantly get lost in this discussion is that violent crime in the US is not particularly high right now by historical standards - e.g. murder:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

If you were to ask the average "person on the street" to guess the murder rate, it would probably depend hugely on whether a school shooting or racially- or politically-motivated murder was currently a big media story. But that hardly corresponds to your risk as an individual.

Oh yeah, I've had that experience where a co-worker "points" to something on your screen by touching it, evidently in the midst of eating a big greasy cheeseburger.

And quite different than the US: "Mainline railroad electrification in the United States is quite rare in comparison to most European or East Asian rail networks, with less than 1% of mainline trackage in the country being electrified"

(wikipedia)

You're making a huge mistake by substituting your list of complaints for the actual question at hand - 'will I more likely be better off if I do or don't go to college.'

The answer is still quite clear. Look at this, the part about changing attitudes is interesting in some way, but the facts pertinent to somebody making this decision is the graph of median annual earnings for those with vs. without a college degree. People obsess over small relative shifts in this size of the gap, but it's nowhere near disappearing - it's huge. https://www.pewresearch.org/so...