Not exactly - it's a growing company, it meant fewer new people need to be hired in the coming year, nobody was actually let go.

A lot of what we see being done with AI is relatively useless. But AI itself has value. I have implemented AI systems where I work, freeing up a number of admin employees who would otherwise have doing been work that is now handled by AI. And speeding up those processes. So in a real sense, AI has delivered efficiencies to my employer. But you're right, we're not deploying chatbots or many of the things that are commonly used to demonstrate AI. I fully expect the AI hype-cycle to continue until it's used only where it delivers benefits.

There's some validity to that, but it applies even more so to a company that *offers* a lifetime price guarantee.

That's logical, but an employee can't generally just demand higher pay and get it.

More likely, in China people will stop entering the tech industries if they're seen as bad places to be working. This builds up a problem for the future for China - it'll take a few years, but China will experience a shortage of skilled tech workers.

It goes both ways - at least where I live.

A married couple is to some extent considered a single economic unit (to use a dehumanising term). On the one hand they can share their tax credits/exemptions, to reduce the taxes they pay. On the other hand their combined incomes are considered when evaluating state benefits etc. If one of the pair are out of work, they don't automatically qualify for state benefits if the other has a good income.

I guess if we want to treat them as individuals we should allow a stay-at-home mother to claim benefits even if the husband is in a very well paid job. It would get very expensive for the government finances.

The argument that there is no "real" free will isn't new. That we are essentially machinery running software. The fact that we can somewhat predict the behaviour and responses of those close to us does somewhat validate that.

But it doesn't mean that reward and punishment are useless or unfair. Both simply provide additional inputs to the algorithm running in our heads that guides our behaviour. If you want to stop me attacking your family and taking your stuff, does it really matter whether or not I really have free will? If the presence of punishment deters me, isn't that good enough?

Agreed
(Replying because I accidentally left a negative rating on parent comment, don't know how to undo it)

I'm not from USA and don't know the terrain, but I assume if it crashed into the ground it'd be fairly easy to find. There'd be some smoke or something. TFA mentions lakes, so presumably it's at the bottom of one of them. That would likely make it difficult to locate.

I'm not so sure. A movie filming a stunt will be done in a controlled way - i.e. they will control the area in which the plane crashes, they will ensure no members of the public will be inured, or property damaged without permission, they will have safety personnel available.

I think the issue here is that (as mentioned by people above) the guy has done the equivalent of jumping from a speeding car on a public road. I don't know American law, but I'd guess there are laws around "reckless endangerment" etc. Not to mention damage to public land.

This is the key point - the articles/papers appear to be talking only about the apps themselves. And although there are some controls implemented by the operating systems of modern phones, an invasive app can be written for IOS or Android.

I'm a long time Android user. I prefer the user experience of Android, and the ability to tinker/customise. Not to mention disliking Apple's approach to DIY repairs and proprietary connectors etc. But my next phone is likely to be an iPhone. A phone is capable of providing a load of data about my life. Which company would I trust more with that capability, Apple or Google? I'm not sure how trustworthy Apple is, but I wouldn't trust Google at all.

There's an after-market device that wraps the battery in your fob, and cuts the power to the fob 180secs after it stops moving.

It's a bit pricey, but works well - I use it.

I'm not sure if I should be posting links, but in the EU you can see it at https://www.carsystems.eu/keyl...

Agreed. I think saving money is part of why Google is doing this, but probably not the entire reason.

Google has put a lot of effort and expense into keeping employees onsite as much as possible - all those free consumables and services, and the honestly impressive working environment. They did this for a reason. I don't work for Google, but I gather the culture there is one where working 9-5 is not an encouraged "normal" working pattern. How do they foster this working pattern with people working from home, where their partner might be finishing at 5, and there's nobody to look disapprovingly at them leaving an office?

It makes sense (beyond the financial) for them to "encourage" people back to the office, while appearing to offer flexibility.

(Replying to remove incorrect moderation I accidentally left)

Doesn't this depend on what we mean by "do business in the EU" though?

Absolutely if they have offices in the EU then they have to abide by EU rules. But I consume services from some non-EU companies (e.g. video games from Russian companies) and it has nothing to do with the EU. To the extent that I don't even pay VAT. The EU has no jurisdiction over those companies, and no way to know that I pay for their services.

At least that's how I think it all works.

European law doesn't prevent ads from being shown. It places limitations on the gathering, storage and sharing of personal data. A company operating in any country needs to either comply with the regulations of that jurisdiction, or abandon that market. This principle applies to European companies operating in the US also.

I'm fine with Tinder deciding to either charge European users or leave Europe. And Google has enough clever people to work within the regulations profitably if it wants to. If not, c'est la vie.

A service that collects and profits from dredging and sharing your personal data isn't really "free" anyway. Maybe the tolerance of Europeans just differs from the tolerance of Americans for the mining of personal information. Personally, I'm fine with that.