Spain is a little older than the USA... by maybe 300-500-2200 years years, depending how you count

Money is the same in every place, if you are giving money that you will receive back, you will slowly gather the money. It is not that you have to pay all that on one huge payment... And the money Spain saved by investing in renewable energy can be used in this instead of paying for more expensive OIL

i actually do not want to visit Hawaii or any place in the USA, even before Trump... it got worse after 9/11 and even worse now with Trump

While it have some nice things to see, specially nature ones, there are much better places all around the world to see first and that are cheaper, safer and specially now, with less arrogance... and also, with much better historic buildings/ruins (not just steal and concrete jungles, even 150-250 years old is recent compared with many other world locations)

Many people want to visit the USA just because the "movie ads", locations show in the multiple USA based movies (like China is also doing it now with their movies)... but i do not need to move to the other side of the world to see vulcanos or tropical islands, nor big nature parks and mountains. Sure, there are always unique aura in each place, but my time and money is finite. One week in Hawaii vs one week in Azores, Madeira, Canary, Corse, Sardegna, Sicily, Greek islands, Cyprus, Scotland Islands or Caribbean islands... it is a no brainer choice, it is just a matter to choose what visit first

Hopefully of course, the AIs will be given the leeway to ignore the scripts (not the actual script items, just the forced structure). I worked in a tech support call center many years back at this point and I always got pretty low marks on the metrics because I didn't follow the scripts and I also had long call times because I just solved their problems and didn't pull every dirty trick in the book to punt them and get them to call back like the agents with good metrics. The scripts, of course, are always stupid. Anyone with a half decent handle on the problem has already covered most of the script with their initial description of the problem, so being forced through steps they have already taken, etc. can be very difficult. You do have to be able to figure out whether or not they actually did some things they said they did of course, but most support is done via remote now anyway, and an AI can check logs and so forth to figure that out pretty easily and quickly.

Honestly, can't say I disagree with this as a solution for first tier at least at this point. As others have pointed out, this can potentially end phone menu trees. Not to mention that they will likely allow the AI, as an expert system, to actually not use ridiculous call center scripts. I still absolutely think that you need human problem solvers to escalate to, but the first people you usually get on the phone are often not problem solvers. I was on the phone for support with a fast charging station the other day, we were past half an hour on the phone call after many, many "please wait a moment sir" and long silences interspersed with requests for basic information that should have been gathered in the first minute (it was at least 20 minutes in before they bothered to establish my location, the name of the charging port I was at, etc.). Basically, by the time they actually got to the point of actually wanting to try something, I had just gotten a text from my family to come and pick them up. My guess is that, aside from having no idea what they were supposed to be doing, they were also probably overloaded like many call center workers. Probably answering not only chats as well as phone calls, but also quite possibly handling multiple phone calls at once as well.

AIs can handle multiple calls at once without making you wait on hold, and they can get to the point pretty quickly and, if they have the right training data, they aren't clueless about what their job is. So, a well done AI is going to be vastly better than most of the humans you encounter at many call centers. Of course, that's no substitute for the experienced human that you can eventually get after dealing with a clueless human for a while, but the AI can still escalate you if it can't help.

Then, there's the communication issues. AI voices these days tend to be more understandable than humans. Not just because they can be made to speak pretty much any language or assume an accent that is clearly understandable to the listener. I don't just mean because of foreign language speakers either, people with heavy regional accents who speak your own language can be just as hard to understand sometimes over the phone. Not to mention, the AI has no need to constantly put you on hold and off (during which humans are usually cutting off parts of their own message), it doesn't have background noise, it isn't using a microphone that might not work well, and just in general, there are less physical, electrical, and digital layers involved in getting their voice to you. Then going the other way, we have gotten to the point where, though AI might not be better at picking out what you are saying than the best human, it's better than the average human.

All that said, AI is definitely not ideal at this point. It's just probably better than the average call center frontline human if it's properly prepared.

The good should not be an excuse to introduce a bunch of bad, even if the good still outweighs it. The bad should be rigorously minimized. I am not against such cameras, under certain conditions:
1) Strict limitations on what they can be used for. That also sets limits on data retention and on who has access to it (absolutely no 3rd parties)
2) Audits and oversight of how the system is being used, with real consequences for violations. The benefits of each use case to be evaluated from time to time, insufficient benefit or too much opportunity for abuse means the system will no longer be used for that particular use case.
3) Ironclad security to ensure none of this data ever gets out.
And 0) Those limitations on use should be tested against a more fundamental set of (ethical) rules, to ensure that the use is not expanded from "protect the children" to "auto-fine jaywalkers".

Only problem is that I wouldn't trust most governments to get any of these points right.

Look, I hate to even write this because the apologism (to paraphrase "Yeah, but it wasn't all that violent") should invalidate what you're saying automatically - sure, the degree might matter, but it's still clearly over the line - but the summary did use the term "violently smashed". Now, you could say that's exaggeration, or there's another side of the story, etc. What I can tell you anecdotally, though it's not about a creampie, is about the time someone smashed an egg on my back. Or, that is, they tried to, but they hit pointy end (and these were also farm fresh eggs with much stronger shells than modern factory-farmed eggs) first where the eggs have tremendous structural strength, so it was like being hit by a pointy rock that stayed completely intact and then fell and smashed on the floor. The idea that the thing is just soft and harmless can be a misconception. The same goes for a pie. It depends somewhat on whether the pie tin is foil or solid metal, for example. But also on how hard the person is swinging the pie and whether they keep pushing and grinding it in, etc. after (because you know some people really, really will, and quite hard). Basically, you're talking about a punch in the face, barely cushioned by the cream pie. Whichever way you look at it, this is hazing and bullying and it's wrong.

See, this is one of those "quiet part out loud" things. Where a little outburst pretty much proves that your previous claims that this sort of thing is "good natured" is quite simply a lie. It pretty much is all about singling someone out for abusive bullying for you.

Because they're the most powerful and easy to use, and likely only, data manipulation tool a person with no hint of computing-specific education is likely to run across.

IIRC the accident statistics on Tesla and Google auto-driving vehicles show that they're safer than an average newly minted 16 year-old driver, and we've (almost) all been that person at one time.

Ad when has any member of this Sadministration bothered to comply with the Constitution, the law, or an executive order? They do whatever they feel will please the Orangutan in Chief so that he can direct some of the graft their way.

"Needs more Excel training" should not be the answer to any problem.

Their airfoil design was what got the aviation industry under way, no one else had worked out an actual functional design yet. Otto Lelienthal for example was killed when his glider stalled because of poor airfoil configuration. IIRC they also worked out the mechanics of a wind tunnel trying to figure out the correct shape.

Pretty much everyone ignored the Wright brothers' patents at the time, if they hadn't the worldwide aviation industry would have have been stunted for decades.

Aircraft just have an obvious beginning that pretty much everyone is aware of, feel free to pick your own example.

Wow, I can't decide. Either you're remarkably ignorant about the Middle East in general and Iranian society in particular, or you're an Usrael troll. Congratulations!

China learned almost a thousand years ago that attempting to conquer and occupy foreign territory against the wishes of its populace was unsustainable, while trade links and mutual interests could last centuries. Unfortunately the US does not have the history to have learned that, nor the ability to learn from other cultures.