Sorry, I just realized that was worded ambiguously. I meant that it has two-thirds the population of any of those three countries individually. So I should have worded that as:

Mea culpa.

What? Canada's population *density* is much lower than the rest of the EU, but in terms of actual population, you're off by almost an order of magnitude. Canada has about 9.2% of the population of the EU.

Canada has about two-thirds the population of France, the U.K., and Italy, or about half the population of Germany. Canada has more population than any single country in Europe other than Germany, France, the UK, Italy, and Ukraine. With UK now out of the EU and Ukraine not yet in it, that would make Canada the fourth largest country in the EU if it joined. (And even if Ukraine joined, they're within the margin of error of having the same population as Canada.)

So if your argument holds true for Canada, it also holds true for the entire EU.

You might want to rethink your position here. Just saying. I'm not saying Canada should join the EU, since being the only country that's not even remotely in Europe might result in lesser treatment, but if that happens, the reason won't be because their population is too small.

Why do you think they would stop in their tracks every time there's a power or cell tower outage?

Yes, there have been some issues with widespread power outages causing the cars to get confused because things don't look right, but that's a bug, not expected behavior.

And although they won't have fares if they have no cell service, there's no reason to expect them to stop being able to drive. They will do whatever they normally do when they have no fare — find a place to park. Other than for learning about pickups and dropoffs, robotaxis use cellular networks only when they break down, to request remote driving assistance (i.e. relatively rarely).

Oh, yeah, I just realized that this is an expense on the Roku side, so the taxes would cancel out. Ugh.

Then yes, you're correct that there's no possible way for consolidating two businesses to save money without direct job loss, other than perhaps reducing payouts to external companies for things that they both do (e.g. accountants).

Shhh! Don't say that out loud! These morons still think that tax cuts create jobs. Stop trying to educate them!

What was this unnamed "muscle memory breaking change" from 2023? Be specific.

It may not have been in the spec, but if it was widely known that the chip could do it, then it very well could be the case that people purchased the chip because of that, in which case the company unjustly benefitted from the widespread belief that it was supported, and is now seeking to further unjustly benefit by forcing those buyers to spend more money if they want to keep that feature.

Their failure to explicitly make clear that this was a bug and fix it in a timely manner is at least potentially an implied representation that could be subject to promissory estoppel.

In other words, they're probably doing something that violates the law, but we won't know for sure unless someone cares enough to sue over it.

Nope. You forgot the government factor:

($Fox + $Payment - (corporate_income_tax_rate * $Payment)) + ($Roku - $Payment = $Fox + $Roku - (corporate_income_tax_rate * $Payment).

So depending on what state the income is earned in, Anywhere from about 21% to about 30% of that could be going to taxes. So they could easily save $400M in taxes if that payment happens to be at least $1.3 billion or so. I doubt that's the case, of course.

The most critical skill is knowing when you're going into an AI rathole, shutting it down, and coding the relevant bits from scratch. There's nothing like wasting more time on iterative refinement than it would take to write the code by hand to sour an engineer on the use of AI.

The top 1% of the U.S. have $55 trillion dollars. The total U.S. national debt is only $38 trillion. That costs the government $1.4 trillion every year in interest alone. Leveling the playing field by capping everyone's total savings at 8 million per person would wipe out the national debt completely.

Mind you, wiping the national debt out still won't help as long as the Republicans keep overspending and undertaxing to the tune of two trillion a year, but even that should be easily fixable by more sound tax policy, coupled with laws mandating that the federal budget be revenue neutral or positive going forwards.

We've done the math. Have you?

I assume you're saying Pro is massively better for your workload. IMO, thinking is either good or bad, depending on whether it moves you closer to or farther away from correctness.

For example, I've seen certain types of workload (e.g. anything involving image recognition or image segmentation) be massively better with Flash, because Pro overthinks things and ends up changing perfectly correct answers to be wrong, either by coming up with creative ways to misinterpret the prompt or by screwing up the JSON image segmentation fragment so that it can no longer be parsed.

And I've also found that LLMs struggle to understand existing terms in a different context that they weren't trained on. As a result, I've had to substitute nonsense terms in place of terms based on common English words and phrases so that it won't ignore my definitions of those phrases in context and substitute its own understanding of their meaning and give incorrect results. The more thinking you allow, the more likely it is for that to occur.

Sounds like I stepped on a nerve. Here, have some links.

Efforts at designing an educational curriculum that organizes subjects based on neurological development is not even remotely "soft bigotry." It's just optimizing teaching to match peak learning capacities. I don't know where you get this "single study" idea from, but I will point out that the phrase "critical thinking skills" is a very sloppily-defined high-level rollup of many mental abilities combined. Teenagers clearly have the beginnings of some of them. But plenty of evidence from unrelated studies shows significant neurological differences in adulthood that are poignant to this very topic.

Boring kids and making them reject reading is not helping them. Engaging kids and getting them excited about reading is. This is supported not only by science but by the lived experience that most of us had reading those classics and being bored out of our minds by them when we were in school, only to re-discover them and be totally moved by them later, in adulthood.
 

I read that the theory is called "priming" and it goes like this:

The raw neurological capacity for critical thinking skills don't develop in the human brain until 20 years of age (and don't really complete development until around 25). So, in an effort at making that happen sooner and better, we prevail upon young teenagers to read famous "classics" that were written for adults (books like The Grapes of Wrath or The Great Gatsby or etc.). Further, the teacher leads class discussions about the book by asking probing questions and setting the historical context and giving writing assignments about the story's events. This is supposed to stimulate early development of the neural connections associated with critical thinking.

And it doesn't work. AT ALL. It just leaves the kids insanely bored. They can understand the overt plot (which is boring) and the historical setting when told about it (but they can't relate to it because it is nothing like what they have experienced so far in their own lives), but the real substance of what these works contain is just lost on them. Worse yet, it makes them DISLIKE reading! These negative associations motivate them to look for other forms of entertainment so they never really exercise those skills.

If we instead gave them reading material that was more relatable AND more entertaining by virtue of being written specifically FOR their age group, they will actually enjoy reading it. Even if they learn nothing else from it, the sheer fact that they are engaged while reading it means that they will be pushing the boundaries of their attention span, improving their vocabulary, exercise reading comprehension skills, and etc. And best of all many of them will seek more books to read for pleasure after having a positive experience like that, so they will be master readers by the time they hit college and are actually neurologically ready to read stories about the great depression or class struggles, and actually understand their significance.

This is just one element contributing to the problem. Others have pointed out many other elements that also contribute.

RAW, video, anything that grabs stills in real time...