A decent point, but somehow this seems a case where Trump actually acted in (in his judgement) the country's best interests. ... And I'm not sure it wasn't in the country's best interests.

It also seems calculated to discriminate against handicapped folks that need mechanized assistance...but I may be wrong.

Sorry, but wrong. Currently AI is often blatantly wrong in ways that people would never be, but most of the time it does a narrowly specified job decently. It's just that when it doesn't, you may REALLY notice it.

No. Saying that the US and various US entities do it does not imply that China and Russia aren't also doing it, and perhaps at greater volume. (Though that last needs at least a bit of evidence.)

OTOH, it's quite plausible that the tactics are more effective in the US than in more tightly controlled environments.

That changed the number of practicing doctors.

Astroturfing is, but definition, and organized activity pretending to not be an organized activity. I've absolutely no reason to believe that various US organizations don't engage in it.

Astroturfing was invented in the US. To claim we don't do it is just silly. (But I would suspect that it might be more companies than the govt.)

I had a sister that lived in South Dakota for awhile. The wild lands were great, but she couldn't find decent friends. She left within a few years, even though she had bought a house because she thought she'd like it. It *wasn't* the climate that drove her away.

Read the post above for an alternative explanation.
It begins:

I *think* his point is that there's a multi-year time-lag. Which is true. And the problem is that by the time that lag-time has passed, the jobs required will be different.

I'm not sure where you get the "almost no support cost". The article I read about the Chinese factory said that the robots were just about all being replaces (by newer models) after only a year.

In this case Trump is more a symptom than a cause. Local policing is more of a state level, or even city level, affair. But, yeah, it's a related event.

And remember, you should expect people to act in ways that make their job easier. It doesn't always happen that way, but that's what you should expect, no matter what the rules say.

That's possible, but you didn't cite your source for the statistic. And I think it quite unlikely, so, for me, you really need decent evidence rather than just a claim.

What do you mean "disproven"? Are you saying that mirrors don't reflect, that it won't be cost effective, or what?

They've got a lot more components to their system...and the tooling isn't all software. As for software, IIUC, they're using a different multi-processing library. Making the weights compatible doesn't make the entire system compatible.