How did you figure out this diagnosis?

While obesity hits an all time high, one wonders if we traded one vice for another? Is it better to smoke if it means you eat less? Or vice versa? What's the tradeoff in health?

Are there more health problems as a result of smoking or obesity, in cases where one has made this trade?

I get where you're going but plenty of smokers are obese.

The meme of "model having Virginia Slims for lunch" is probably just a very specific subset of the overall smoking population.

But of course I'm also just going off anecdata/own experience

Mental health problems in young people are also at all time highs and nicotine has known palliative affects on some mental health problems.

But something like 50% of studies don't replicate?

It's both easy to forget why Uber/Lyft was revolutionary and easy to remember why.

They should be faster, but don't they support voice commands while driving? That's the idea so you don't have to touch it much or at all while driving.

It goes both ways, does it not? Companies and their respective goods or service can't survive without being profitable.

Amazon survived just fine without being profitable for something like two decades.

I feel like we would all have been better off if Amazon had not been allowed to do this.

I absolutely agree.

Investors are willing to put a premium on growth, even if it means the company is unprofitable (for certain definitions of unprofitable — you have to be convincing that you could be profitable, if only you stopped spending so much on growth). If you're unprofitable and losing users you're in trouble.

Was that proven? And how close did employees get to taking over the company?

Employees weren't staging a literal mutiny, I was using the term creatively.

Here are some links about the worker unrest at ABK prior to acquisition announcement:

Activision Blizzard worker organization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activision_Blizzard_worker_org...

Activision Blizzard employees stage open-ended strike and union drive: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021/12/activision-blizzard-w...

Its noteworthy that the employee strikes mostly stopped after the acquisition was announced - seems they believed like I do that Microsoft would have cleaned things up.

Wouldn't it be useful for tracking down any human being?

Is anyone else getting tired of the "employees say", "experts say", "researchers say" tactic in journalism?

How many? And importantly, what percentage is that? What do the other employees or experts say?

I'm getting tired of the obvious deflection attempts when something bad comes out about big tech corps.

Media coverage, taken uncritically, to me would seem to suggest that big tech is worse than oil, gambling, tobacco, etc. - at least in terms of how much ink gets spilled on their misdeeds.

I don't understand why we have this fantasy that this is unrelated to the very real impact that big tech has had specifically on the media in terms of redirecting advertising revenue and commoditizing their business.

Not worse, but I do think that "big tech" are the modern-day oil barons/railroad tycoons/etc., with all that comes with that.

The problem is all the old tycoons still exist!

> How many?

The article provides that information:

The trusted internet-search giant is providing low-quality information in a race to keep up with the competition, while giving less priority to its ethical commitments, according to 18 current and former workers at the company and internal documentation reviewed by Bloomberg.

> according to 18 current and former workers at the company

So 18 of > 200k people? I bet I could find 18 X/Googlers to say a lot of things

The article does give more information, e.g. "...according to 18 current and former workers at the company and internal documentation reviewed by Bloomberg," and identifies "the AI governance lead, Jen Gennai" directly for some of the claims.

21 experts, according to 90% of researches - an employee said.

In a headline? No, its making a statement about whose opinion is featured in the article. I find that weakly informative.

Sometimes all it takes is 1.

I think you mean:

Google's Rush to Win in AI Led to Ethical Lapses, Employees Do Not Say

I mean, Elon Musk just said in his interview yesterday that he was friends with Larry Page until he realized Larry Page had zero concerns about ethics and AI safety and called Musk a “speciesist”.

I’d say if that’s the attitude of the founder it’s very likely this story is true.

I believe “self-driving” Teslas have a higher body count than Google Search, but go off.

Musk is not a very reliable source at this point. Especially when discussing ethics.

Musk says lots of nonsense. I wouldn't believe him just because he says something.

I mean, it wouldn't surprise me if that's true, but it's pretty risky just taking Musk's word for it.

Usually it means two people were willing to talk to a reporter.

It worked for Bezos!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DEwmbZVVoAEfWJq.jpg

Is he on hormone therapy? I guess when you're a billionaire the doctors mix you up a good cocktail.

He's almost certainly on some form of juice given the speed with which I remember he packed that on at his age.

However, his amount of muscle isn't actually outside the realm of pure hard work unlike some of the Hollywood guys.

Rob McElhenney has a funny bit about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPOzOanrNyg