Someone is anthropomorphizing.

Oh come on now - the outcome of the training is literally transformative (c.f. GPT, i.e. generative pretrained transformer), hence not a copyright violation. </s>

(Ok, so this ^ was sarcasm. If any lawyer uses this as a defence in court I apologise for potentially giving them the idea. On the plus side, perhaps I could then sue them for copyright violation??)

Except that the northern hemisphere has over twice as much (~2.1:1) land area as the southern hemisphere, meaning rather more plants.

If you ever look at a 'zoomed in' graph of atmospheric CO2 levels the curve is distinctly saw-toothed, as levels rise and fall over the course of a year.

I'll just leave this here, lest some other ignoramus takes your blather too seriously.

In fact, have a snippet, for those unable / unwilling to follow links: "The new analysis for Carbon Brief shows that China’s emissions were down 1.6% year-on-year in the first quarter of 2025 and by 1% in the latest 12 months. Electricity supply from new wind, solar and nuclear capacity was enough to cut coal-power output even as demand surged, whereas previous falls were due to weak growth. The analysis, based on official figures and commercial data, shows that China’s CO2 emissions have now been stable, or falling, for more than a year."

Now, whilst I have seen breathless headlines suggesting that the US's total emissions are rising once more, allegedly as a result of Donnie's trumpie tantrums against wind and solar, I think I'd rather wait for the official historical figures (assuming they can still be collected) before engaging in too much finger pointing. Having said that however, and to engage in a little whataboutism, the most recent data I have easy access to shows that, despite being the global manufacturing centre of the world, China's CO2 emissions were 8.66 tonnes / capita in 2024, compared with 14.20 tonnes / capita in the US.

One is minded to point out the adages to "remove the plank from one's own eye, before trying to remove the splinter from the eye of another" and to "set one's own house in order, before it's too late"...

Yeah, that was a train wreck. Dude looks out of his tree...

That said, what puzzles me most about that interview was the financial breakdown by the host (to paraphrase): "Your market cap is ~$11 billion, you've got ~$9 billion on your balance sheet ... you provide all your stock, and then your cash, that gets you to $20 billion..."

Um, what?

You can't just add those numbers together to get the net value of the company (or the sum value of its assets, including goodwill, expected future earnings, etc.). They represent the same damn thing!

If the (net) assets a company holds are valued at, or worth, more than its market capitalisation it's normally a good time to buy shares. If the converse is true, then the market is, presumably, considering intangibles and expected future performance in arriving at the share price. What no-one on Earth does (or at least I thought so, up 'til now) is add-up both sides of the balance sheet and say that that represents the true value of the company. That's just insane!

This is a good way to grow. The old "the first hit is free" model. However, in this scenario, the AI companies should give their product away for free and recognize no revenue. They can report active users per month or something similar. Subsiding the sales and then recognizing the revenue feels like fraud.

Does it really take $1.25 billion in opex to give away $9 billion? WOW!

$1.25 billion get you 5,000 employees making 250k each. At a charity???? (I know. There is also coffee, insurance, rent, lawyers, etc.)

Who on earth is running this place? Oh. Wait...

It's genius. Say the product is too dangerous, and you can't have it. Have the few people who actual touch it sign NDAs.

Sit back watch the news go wild.

Company valuation jumps.

The CIA is running Chinese language ads looking for spies.
https://www.theguardian.com/us...

The US will pay very good money for secrets.

These guys could have quietly cut a deal with the NSA/CIA. Now that China knows to look for them, they better watch their backs. Talk about poking the dragon.

those in power will want it to go away.

Are you sure? I mean, really sure?

After all, the link you provided states "Disposable income is the amount of money a household has available for spending and saving after income taxes have been deducted" then goes on to qualify this with "This figure will be the most significant dollar amount because government taxes at the federal and state level are not included in the figure."

You'll note that missing from either of these quotes (or any other rider on that page) is any reference to: adjustments for state funded healthcare; parental leave allowance, or maternity or paternity pay; social security benefits / in work benefits; and so on.

So, I wonder, what is it, in toto, that you think 'Disposable income' covers exactly?

It might take one person one year to write 25k lines. How does a person get their head around that in 15 hours? One little "why on earth is this here" question can generate an hour or more in research with product managers, asking developers, reading 1000's of pages of documentation.... If it is fintech quant code, good luck with finding a quick explanation.

Weak signals over a long distance. You may as well try to listen to people whispering in China from the US.
(Why would a civilization dedicate a large amount of resources, say 1,000+ nuclear power plants, to send a very narrow signal into the void hoping for a billion+ to one chance of hitting our little planet at a time we are listing - Not before the Romans or after we're cooked. Engineers start with: how can I send the message with as little cost (materials, power, etc) as possible? If they over engineer, they get fired. "Close" in this context is 10,000 light years. Millions of light years for galaxies.)

..of removing actual intelligence in order to replace it with "intelligence-native" AI, which is all A and no I.

Apparently Block deals with financial transactions. I see no reason to worry at all. /s