Then you end up with vague tickets you can't act on. You can't win, and I say that from bitter experience.

While AI is unreliable, I have to point out that human summaries aren't all that reliable either. I've read more than a few textbooks that were full of obvious nonsense and terrible advice.

I tried AI for a web app I made for personal use. It couldn't build a working app, but it did at least get me the keywords I needed to google to build my own. Some of the tech it suggested was outdated and deprecated, so basically about as reliable as the Reddit posts it was trained on.

Typically we don't destroy an entire firm for the misconduct of one employee, unless it's so extreme that it justifies screwing all their other clients. Imagine if your case was headed to court and your lawyer said their firm had been wiped out by another employee using AI, so you need to find another lawyer and hope the court is willing to accommodate the delay. Even if the court is, re-doing much of the process, document exchange, and so on will take a lot of time and create more expense, that you might end up being liable for if you lose.

To be fair, lawyers do use external services that in theory leak a lot of information about their cases all the time, and have done for decades. Databases of case law are the obvious example. The searches give an insight into what the lawyer is thinking, what their likely arguments will be, things they may have overlooked.

Naturally those services offer confidentiality, the same as the phone company promises not to listen to the lawyer's call to their client, unless legally compelled to.

The question is, are there any AI legal research services offering that?

They believe they are superior humans, proven by the fact that they are rich or at the forefront of the latest tech bubble. Never mind dad's emerald mine...

People expect to be paid for commute time too, at least in the sense that they will want more money if the commute is longer. Work from home made just coming to the office at all something which people want more money for.

$6 billion could do a lot to end hunger in many parts of the world. Instead, Musk bought Twitter and turned it into a hellsite, and told people to have more kids.

Knowing them, they hired some AI wiz kids who wanted to move fast and break things. Meanwhile the poor engineers who are slowly making really important and valuable improvements to the core browser aren't getting any help. Maybe some vibe coded Javascript engine updates are next on the list.

You can't trust these billionaires. Musk said if someone explained how he could end hunger for $6 billion, he would do it. He was presented with a credible plan by the United Nations' World Food Program, and quietly forgot about it his promise.

This feels self serving. What are the chances that if they discover some miracle cure for cancer, they charge top dollar for it?

Clearly some of their customers want EV trucks. But why don't more of them want them?

Could it be because Trump doesn't like EVs, and because Republicans have done everything they can to stifle installation of the infrastructure that makes owning an EV convenient?

It seems to be the way they went about it, as much as anything. The volunteers would probably have accepted first drafts created by AI, or suggestions for changes, but Mozilla just overwrote their work, bypassing them entirely.

It's about half the size of the larger cargo ships too, but still quite competitive. I'm sure they can scale up, Running costs should be lower due to less fuel use (it still uses some around ports).

Speed isn't such a big deal for this sort of thing, that can be worked into the logistics. Maybe they will have drone ships eventually anyway, so it's not even costing any more in wages.

These types of store are actually common in parts of Europe, and there are some in the UK. People end up squeezing through the checkout queue to get out.

The technical term is a lexical unit. Sometimes two words together mean some specific thing, most often with nouns. Sometimes the space disappears over time, sometimes it gets hyphenated, sometimes it just stays as two words that refer to some specific thing.

Basically, if it would appear in the dictionary, it can be word of the year, even if it's two or three words.