Who could have seen this coming?

Historically we call a country "socialist" if it follows the main idea of socialism, which is that the means of production are collectivised. That is how I was using the term here, and that is indeed in opposition to "capitalism". If people want to use their own definition, they have to provide it first. That being said, societies can be capitalist with bits of socialism (for example, with collectivised public services). That's still a capitalist society. How would you define "capitalist socialism"?

I think you're missing the point being made. That point is that the schools only exist for this type of curriculum.

Side note: isolating small problems to solve separately, instead of looking at things holistically, is being taught in these curricula. It can make sense sometimes, but it's also a way to deflect or avoid social responsibility.

Europe is not socialist, I'm not sure where you got that idea. Having pubic healthcare does not make a country socialist, it just makes it not insane. Europe is capitalist, including countries with centre-left governments. Big private companies employ lots of people, and shareholders make them inhumane with their employees, just like in the US. Europe has business schools. OP does not only apply to the US.

We had a good few years at some point, with a reasonable offer that fulfilled a need: pay a subscription to Netflix, get lots of films and series. Those times are long gone and that's no consumer's fault, the culprit is the greed of the rich wanting to get richer. Hit them where it matters by making it unprofitable to be greedy. I'm not paying for multiple subscriptions, that's stupid, I am not a resource to be milked for profit. Unlike with music, pirating video content made for mass consumption has never been as ethical as it is now.

My intuitive, out-of-the-box 2 cents: it sounds like you're not autistic. That puts you in the minority here.

He is one of very few in a position to take a principled stand and he's doing it, we should all be grateful for it. People at the top are often risk-averse and that's how nothing changes for the better.

The issue is that tools give people the impression that they can escape responsibility and therefore accountability. And if the law confirms that, we're all fucked. So there needs to be a severe sanction against someone, and I mean a real person, not a fine to a company. Otherwise we create dystopia one step at a time.

I don't deny anything, I'm not sure where you got that idea. I also don't know why you feel the need to be aggressive but it's off-putting.

I asked for specific examples of your claim. I haven't used windows in ages so I have no idea, genuinely. No need to write a long ranty answer with zero example. I'm also interested in where you get this value of 20%, I have only encountered rare cases of games that do not work with proton and I think they have been fixed since then; but this might say more about my taste in games than anything else.

Which loss of functionality are you referring to?

There are plenty of women who are not like that, in fact they are the vast majority I believe, I hope you end up finding them. You may have to look in different places or with a different mindset. A first step would be to not waste your time with anyone who feels entitled to you buying them food or drinks. Start on a basis of equality and independence, and you won't have to deal with entitlement. Of course the people you meet this way will have no patience for any form of entitlement coming from you either, fair is fair.

It seems like you are conflating "AI" with "LLMs". I think it's a mistake. There are better AI tools than LLMs for pricing.

Does TFA say that this is LLM-powered? I didn't find such a statement, maybe I glanced too fast. I would find it surprising that they use an LLM for that. Pricing is generally an optimisation problem, LLMs are not very good at optimisation. "How much is a person willing to pay" is a prediction problem and there's also algorithms better and cheaper than LLMs for that.

The keyword is "overreliance". That automatically makes it a human mistake, not an AI mistake, because the humans choose how much they rely on the tool.