Xi attempting anything resembling public magnanimity is a joke.

Meanwhile China's in the throes of deflation and domestic demand destruction. Subsidizing even more low-to-no-profit industry is not what the doctor ordered.

Triggering a foreign economic collapse would kill their exports which are the only thing holding up their economy.

I wouldn't say pragmatic, no. He's tried it, found it works, and now won't listen to the people pointing out the numerous problems with it.

He has pointed out AI's flaws and limitations. He has also said the beneft is it gets him to the starting point more quickly to either figure out a bug or how to do something, or even how to rewrite something he's already done. He is not blindly accepting what it says.

Trust, but verify would be closer to his thinking.

See "Plan A". That will never happen because it assumes the US govt. will make only wise, honest, and insightful decisions, but just try to come up with a better "Plan B" that doesn't start WWIII.

1) We keep changing the training methods.
2) We keep improving validation methods.
3) The evidence we've reached peak AI is, at the very best, shaky.
4) The best models at any time probably aren't public either in accessibility or even in knowledge that they exist.
5) John Henry may have driven deeper than the steam engine, but the steam engine drove deep enough. And the strain killed John Henry. You don't see many people driving steel pegs anymore.

etc.

There's no guarantee the the models will continue to be open weight.

Also, if it's actually done by distilling, it will be quite fragile outside the predetermined area. (But bet on harnesses to solve that problem.)

Why is it all these earth like worlds exist, but no signs of life ?

We don't know that. There could be organisms living on one or more of these planets, but we can't detect them. Maybe it's a type of moss or simply bacteria.

Until we visit these planets, we cannot say with any certainty life doesn't exist on these worlds.

1) What do you mean "earth like"?
2) How do you know there isn't any life?

There's a problem there. Centralized power means a single entity is in control of that power. I don't think there's any way around that. If that single entity has an agenda, it will use that power to further the agenda. The only solution I can see is decentralization of power. That was what the tripartite government was supposed to achieve. It worked pretty well until the executive branch became too powerful. It's worked increasingly less well since FDR. But things are so complicated that the legislature has been giving the executive branch increasing power, and the courts have been acquiescent.

Trump is a symptom of a much more basic problem. Presidents have always abused their power, but it used to be a lot more limited. (Though look a Lincoln.)

They probably need to keep the data around for a while, for legal reasons. They might get sued, and if it was deleted it will be worse for them. They might get a law enforcement request for the data, and it would look bad if they deleted it.

The bigger issue is that unless you get lucky and go viral, there is no way to get this kind of thing resolved and all you can do is sue to get your costs covered.

And also diver's watches, so there is no excuse for smart watches not having a replaceable battery either. People understand perfectly well that they need to have the gasket properly replaced if they want to maintain water resistance. Not that anyone would warranty a smart watch by the time the battery needs replacing.

It's almost impossible to anonymize search data. Google can do it internally and simply avoid processing it in a way that could reveal identities, to comply with GDPR, but other companies will not be so limited. In theory GDPR applies to them too, but the danger is that we end up in a Facebook like situation with shadow profiles on people who have never used their services.

That's a reasonable guess, but I bet the language was French or German, and there often are changes in meaning when one translates. (Even within the same language. Consider "Baby sitter" vs "nanny".)

OK. That's a specific use case that's hard to argue with. It didn't occur to me as I've never needed it...and I can't think of anything that it would be useful for that I either do or would like to do.

I don't think Google should be required to provide anonymized search data to rivals. Firstly, that's effectively their intellectual property.

Oh, I wouldn't worry about that. I'm sure the others will do something transformative with the data.