My wife works in a library. Some of these people become not just defensive, but outright hostile. Part of the problem is socioeconomic and education based. A lot (not all but a lot) of people using libraries on a daily basis don't have much formal education and have little experience with computers. Much of my wife's work is just helping people do very basic tasks, like showing someone how to open a Word document, or how to download or upload a file for a job application. So for probably some of these patrons, ChatGPT must seem like magic. The interface is simply typing what they want, and even highly misspelled or garbled requests will generate something like a coherent response from it, so they don't even need to know what any icon means. And if one is dealing with people who often literally don't understand the difference between a file stored on a computer and a file on the cloud (to use one common example) then even explaining the idea of an AI hallucination is going to be an uphill battle.

As is the case for almost all international treaties, enforcement mechanisms are limited. Egregious violators will get pressure from other countries. Many countries will depend on citizens to enforce it. For example, in some countries regular citicizens can file lawsuits when their country is not fulfilling treaty obligations. But generally, when countries sign on to international treaties, most involved countries also pass internal legislation to comply with treaty aspects. This is the way for almost all international treaties, and it largely works. People have an idea that international law doesn't work but the vast majority works fine, and we often just notice the serious failures and breakdowns, not all the stuff that is quietly working on a day-to-day basis.

If by "will go back" you mean "will be deported". If they're even allowed to stay long enough to graduate...

Make it an Xbox game -- try to import things while avoiding / minimizing tariffs.
(Ironically, there will probably be a tariff on the game.)

I dunno. China is a "market socialist" system -- which is a contradiction in terms. If China is socialist, then for practical purposes Norway and Sweden have to be even *more* socialist because they have a comprehensive public welfare system which China lacks. And those Nordic countries are rated quite high on global measures of political and personal freedom, and very low on corruption. In general they outperform the US on most of those measures, although the US is better on measures of business deregulation.

Those bonds will help keep the air conditioning and refrigerator on when a hurricane wipes out electricity for weeks in half your state.

Substitute snowmageddon or heat dome as regionally appropriate.

It makes no sense to claim Chinese courts have a lot of power, although it may seem that way â" itâ(TM)s supposed to seem that way. One of the foundational principles of Chinese jurisprudence is party supremacy. Every judge is supervised by a PLC â" party legal committee â" which oversees budgets, discipline and assignments in the judiciary. They consult with the judges in sensitive trials to ensure a politically acceptable outcome.

So it would be more accurate to characterize the courts as an instrument of party power rather than an independent power center.

From time to time Chinese court decisions become politically inconvenient, either through the supervisors in the PLC missing something or through changing circumstances. In those cases there is no formal process for the party to make the courts revisit the decision. Instead the normal procedure is for the inconvenient decision to quietly disappear from the legal databases, as if it never happened. When there is party supremacy, the party can simply rewrite judicial history to its current needs.

An independent judiciary seems like such a minor point; and frankly it is often an impediment to common sense. But without an independent judiciary you canâ(TM)t have rule of law, just rule by law.

Hereâ(TM)s the problem with that scenario: court rulings donâ(TM)t mean much in a state ruled by one party. China has plenty of progressive looking laws that donâ(TM)t get enforced if it is inconvenient to the party. There are emission standards for trucks and cars that should help with their pollution problems, but there are no enforcement mechanisms and officials have no interest in creating any if it would interfere with their economic targets or their private interests.

China is a country of strict rules and lax enforcement, which suits authoritarian rulers very well. It means laws are flouted routinely by virtually everyone, which gives the party leverage. Displease the party, and they have plenty of material to punish you, under color of enforcing laws. It sounds so benign, at least theyâ(TM)re enforcing the law part of the time, right? Wrong. Laws selectively enforced donâ(TM)t serve any public purpose; theyâ(TM)re just instruments of personal power.

Americans often donâ(TM)t seem to understand the difference between rule of law and rule *by* law. Itâ(TM)s ironic because the American Revolution and constitution were historically important in establishing the practicality of rule of law, in which political leaders were not only expected to obey the laws themselves, but had a duty to enforce the law impartially regardless of their personal opinions or interests.

Rule *by* law isnâ(TM)t a Chinese innovation, it was the operating principle for every government before 1789. A government that rules *by* law is only as good as the men wielding power, and since power corrupts, itâ(TM)s never very good for long.

What's the long-term game-plan for "smart" / connected appliances? My Whirlpool refrigerator was left by the previous owner when I bought my house in 1993, so it's at least 32 years old, and we got our Kenmore washer and dryer in 1993. All three still run great. On a related note, my 2001 Civic and 2002 CR-V are still running well. Thankfully, none of my appliances/cars have this crap. Are companies planning on supporting these "smart" / connected features and touch screens for 30+ years? History so far says nope.

Yup, 'cause the Taliban is known for giving up easily and being lenient to people breaking morality decrees. /s

Or, hear me out, we fire 80% of our workforce, degrade quality, and make the remaining 20% work 10 hours a day.
ha ha, only serious

Related Rick and Morty - er, Summer ...

So, just close your eyes and think of Erlang -- or something like that? :-)

Fast, good, cheap - pick two.

Or, hire another programmer.