That's a pretty moronic takeaway. With tariffs on their supply chain, some components become too expensive to bother with when selling in the US market, so they can simply not provide those models in the US where the tariffs eat away too much of their margins to make it worthwhile. That doesn't mean that they can't continue to source and supply those systems in other countries that aren't run by clowns.

Definitely a pair of companies that deserve each other.

Good luck finding a European labour court that will agree that an employee is non-performant just because they happen to WFH.

There are plenty of people who should be launched into space, just without any need for one of those returny rockets.

you must offer 50% more pay. If you want people to not act like employees and instead like owners, then they need to be similarly incentivized. Google's lack of competitiveness is also not going to be improved by trying to work the rank and file to death.

It was also devised with the notion that the machine would get smarter. It didn't account for the fact another way to pass the test is for the human to get dumber.

Unfortunately regulation takes time, so they'll probably get away with it for a while before eventually being slapped down. A similar thing happened with automotive OEMs that were intentionally trying to cripple their vehicles and restore them to normal behaviour behind a subscription model.

Any company that makes its money writing bubble sort implementations in python will be absolutely killing it with AI.

If you invested in an antigravity machine scheme, you shouldn't be surprised when you lose your investment. What exactly does the due diligence on complete and utter horseshit look like? Maybe he can settle out of court with his investors by providing them with NFTs of the alien as compensation.

Chinese company obligated to comply with local laws, news at 11.

If that's the most significant, I'd hate to see the least significant.

This is what is regularly done with supercomputers, so I don't see why they wouldn't just do the same here.

If one follows the WHO timeline, they took a measured and incremental approach from when the first cases were discovered before declaring it a pandemic in March 2020. Meanwhile, Trump was already declaring it over in February 2020. Out of these two, it's not the WHO that mismanaged the US response.

It did, just not in the market they were hoping for: https://www.precedenceresearch...

Boeing investigating itself is about as useful as Boeing rubber-stamping its own processes and planes, where if any of those had been up to snuff, their would be no need for investigations in the first place. Anything other than a complete audit by an independent third-party with zero interference from Boeing is a joke.