Non-disclosure agreements are only as potent as the lawyers behind them, which in this case means that Apple's lawyers would completely overwhelm whatever piddly lawyers a bunch of poor startup founders could afford. That NDA wouldn't be worth the paper it's printed on or the flash it's stored in.

This is the way. In addition to the written test, have a 3-minute oral test on the exact same material that the written test covered, one-on-one with each student. That oral test becomes a multiplier against the written test score. But this does take more time and effort on the part of the professor. For 100 students, that comes out to well over 5 hours.

The students should be told in advance so that they will be scared into studying.

I'm surprised there's no mention of Trump and immigration. In STEM fields, anywhere from 30-65% of PhD students are foreign students. For computer science and engineering, the percentage is near 60%. Not being able to get a visa, being fearful of the Trump government, and uncertainty about work visas and green cards is arguably more significant than even funding for some programs.

Or adopt American-style democracy. Have the citizens contemplate why their electricity rates are increasing 25% when most of the benefits are supporting the data centers, and then have those voters vote in the leaders they want. Why are the current leaders helping the data centers? Have they receive individual gifts, or have the companies provided tangible concessions to the county and its people?

"it doesn't provide any real world utility either, Grantham argued. "People don't use it to make serious trades, they don't use it to buy their dinner and pay at the supermarket. ... What it does is allows crooks to move money around," he said.

Do you dispute any part of this guy's explanation of why bitcoin is "useless." Aside from black market money movement and financial speculation, bitcoin literally has no practical use.

Depending on what you define as a small car, this is absolutely not true. There are well over 1 million Toyota Corolla class cars sold annually in the US. Not a single one of these cars is made by an American company. They are mostly Japanese and Korean.

Why does this happen? Executive bonuses. That's why. Compact cars have 5-8% gross margins, but bigger cars like SUVs and trucks have far greater gross margins in the 15-25% range. American companies have myopia. They want to maximize profits now and don't care about or don't understand future profits. They completely believe that the innovator's dilemma is fake news. Yet, Japanese and Korean companies have 40-45% of the US SUV market, and some of this is due to follow-on sales from those 1 million compact cars sold every year.

The biggest problem in AI architecture is data movement. That's why the GPU memory subsystem takes so much chip area, to achieve huge data bandwidth. That's also why GPUs do well in training and are able to handle evolving AI models better than ASICs.

Couldn't potential RAM manufacturers lock in long-term contracts, sort of like oil futures? That would be a win-win for phone companies and RAM makers. Even if the big RAM makers try to bust the future market with price dumps, the phone companies would still win due to market predictability, which is a huge thing.

No, the big difference between the Chinese car companies and Tesla, etc. is that there was a deliberate national policy intended to dump below-market priced vehicles in foreign countries. If China simply wanted to foster economic or technological development within China or to advantage a subset of Chinese companies to the detriment of other Chinese companies, no one outside of China would care. The problem is entirely that of a Chinese strategy to promote their companies at the intended detriment of non-Chinese companies.

This proposal doesn't look like a tax but rather like seizure via eminent domain. Taking 50% of someone's property is very close to seizing the property outright. If this were allowed, then the government could seize half of someone's real property without any compensation. I imagine that such a move would be challenged all the way to the Supreme Court.

Perhaps a tax against "income" from funds derived from borrowing against unrealized gains is a better and more fair alternative. It's real money derived from stock holdings, sort of like another form of dividends.

The super big problem with the proposed tax isn't the fairness question. The big problem is that it's a one-time windfall that might trigger recurring spending proposals. Locking in recurring spending based on one-time income is a super stupid financial decision.

I think the framing uses "work" (not described what that might be) as a proxy for some complex task. The article also mentions talking to his daughter and communicating remotely with the UCD researchers. Work is mentioned not to impute any inherent value to that work but to imply that the computer system can accomplish non-trivial, complex, useful tasks.

Some people derive fulfillment or other social or emotional benefits from their work, but many do not, instead deriving life-sustaining money from work.

There is essentially no agreement of significance. When the ships start sailing, then we can say some negotiating progress has been made. Even then, the nuclear issue and the sanctioned Iranian assets and compensation issues, which are the real issues, are still unlikely to be quickly settled. You can easily see how this will play out as both the Americans and Iranians are touting their own negotiating successes. Iran cannot seem weak in accepting all American demands without getting something in return, and Trump won't accept anything less than complete Iranian surrender across all issues. There may be a few electronic signatures on a pre-settlement agreement of something fuzzy, but all the key points of contention remain as before.

It's interesting that standardized tests recognize the importance of reading comprehension. However, due to logistical constraints, the reading passages in those tests run only a few paragraphs. Not surprisingly, we produce workers that are geared to reading short passages. Online resources, social media, texting, etc. further this propensity toward short-form reading. Yet, there are many professions that require long-form reading. Lawyers, doctors, engineers, etc. reading legal cases and contracts, research and project reports, etc. Long-form reading comprehension is not an instinctive ability but rather a skill that must be trained. However, our educational system not only structurally avoids this type of training, it has pivoted to allowing good grades and success while avoiding long-form reading. It used to be that reading textbooks helped in classes. Now, even reading assigned novels in literature classes is not needed because AI is a super-charged Cliff Notes that requires even less reading than Cliff Notes.

I'm not sure MAGA folks think that Trump is trustworthy, maybe, maybe not. What they think is that their lives are not what they expected. Income equality has hit them hard. They're frustrated. Trump comes along and tells them that it's not their fault. It's the fault of Democrats, Biden, immigrants, Africans, Latin Americans, Chinese, blue states, etc. The one thing MAGA folk have despite income equality is a sea of votes. A populist comes along and sweeps away all their problems by blaming their social enemies. The blame was never really reasonable, but reason is not needed because the blame is felt viscerally. This is why Trump without fear of retribution can murder someone in Times Square, or say that he loves inflation, or unilaterally start a new war after blaming Biden for starting wars, etc. The social blame is what endures. Outsiders might view that blame as hate, but MAGA sees it as liberation.