I mean, he's open about his harem and concubines. Can't blackmail something that he proudly displays in public view! It's the modern version of the failed Sukarno blackmail.

In defense of manual check-ins, there are key warnings and requests for consent that do need human consent rather than an AI doing it for you. You have reminders of prohibited cargo for baggage, requesting consent for assisting crews for exit row seating, etc. These aren't the long scrolls of terms of service either, these are basic, big icon and pop up warnings. If the AI agent is doing it for you, you can't confirm that humans are consenting to the airline's terms.

Part of it too is that China has an extremely competitive EV market. They had at one point over 500 different manufacturers. Even with recent consolidation, they're still 100 or so different producers. Many of these producers have backing by local and provincial level innovation and investor funds. This has resulted in rapid innovation in EV technology, design, and manufacturing as well as driving costs out of platforms. It's not just the OEM, the entire supply chain and ecosystem has been forged by extreme competition into a fast, nimble, and cost effective machine. It's hard for any foreign car manufacturer to compete, let alone survive, in that kind of environment.

As we used to tag on Slashdot, #whatcouldpossiblygowrong.

This is an example of one of the legitimate challenges facing the increased integration of AI into warfare. The AI does its work well enough that the humans in the loop who are supposed to be supervising it are lulled into a false confidence of the AI's ability. Thus, when the humans are supervising numerous decisions in a high pressure, time critical schedule, they begin "abdicating" decision authority to the AI by just assuming it's right, resulting in lethal mistakes. You have the veneer of humans in the loop, but they realistically can't execute their supervisory responsibilities in practice. There is also the challenge of who has responsibility: is it the human in the loop who was supposed to be supervising? The AI provider? In many ways, it's no different than the problem we see in other AI applications like "full self driving" in next generation vehicles.

That was good propaganda, but space has been militarized from its earliest days. Besides the obvious like the Soviets mounting guns on their space station, space satellites have been used primarily for military purposes from reconnaissance to nuclear weapons command and control. The real reason it wasn't weaponized sooner was a gentlemen's agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. With so much nuclear command and control went through space, an attack on space assets could be seen as the first step in a nuclear attack. So therefore, neither side would touch those satellites. However, as space became more commercial as well as military missions shifting from the strategic to non-nuclear tactical purposes, that gentlemen's agreement gradually eroded.

Who then takes those billions, joins Marie Le Pen's National Rally to drive an ultra-nationalist, right wing French agenda.

Please, don't inflate her ego with this kind of nonsense. Last thing we need is to create the Elon Musk of Europe.

Don't worry, I'm sure they'll find some legitimate edge case of the FBI tracking a white supremacist's financial spending to prevent a terrorism act and say they're doing the same thing but against trans Mexican communist feminists who are out to destroy America.

So I'm torn on this. On one hand, I agree this is terrible from an ergonomics perspective. Speedometers should be right in front of the drivers. However, a significant cars do this, notably Tesla and the Mini-Cooper. So the precedence has been so long established that I don't know if anyone will step in.

Even then, I would think most businesses wouldn't leave something like that in an open cubby purely for economic espionage concerns.

The announcement itself is innocuous: Gemini Notebook is basically allowing its users to seamlessly load their already purchased books into their tool. If you haven't used it, Notebook let's you upload various materials into it for analysis, quick referencing, etc. This is just making it easier for those who bought books through Google Play. What I would be concerned however if this is a first step by Google to lock down Notebook. Will they later incorporate copyright protections so you can't just upload those PDF versions of your textbook or reference material into Notebook because it's licensing can't be confirmed? Could this be used to block out third party services who failed to pay Google... err... whose copyright can't be confirmed by Google, thus forcing you to use their play store or "approved" third parties?

Pilot programs are for normal companies. This is Silicon Valley. Move fast, break things, then have your minions arrange the flaming wreck into an sculpture that you can declare as a success to your venture capitalist overlords.

This is a neverending fight over money, and Walmart, and the retailer side in general, having lost the fight and throwing in the towel. Ever since contactless payments emerged, credit card companies, tech firms, banks, and retailers have been in a massive battle over the hundreds of billions in transaction fees charged each year. Retailers learned the hard way how credit card companies have forced their way in, essentially harvesting up to 1.5%-3.5% per transaction. When they saw tech firms like Apple and Google also working their way in, essentially adding another 1-2% into those transaction fees, they tried everything they could to push consumers in a different direction. Unfortunately, retailers just couldn't put together a decent alternative, and Walmart giving up on their sad app signals their surrender.