I don’t think that my career has been eroded by even 1%. The areas of erosion listed by the author feel like reverse order to me. The domain is knowing what questions to ask. That’s the last thing to be replaced.
I think that if you are a skilled software engineer and can adapt, you will be amplified in all aspects. If you just like writing artisanal code, you might have a bad time.
AI is currently, actively getting better. That might stop in a year, and you can argue whether it’s linear or exponential, but it’s very difficult to argue that it won’t get better in the near term. On the other hand, arguing that we hit a plateau at this time is just ignoring reality.
It’s 100% trackable. It’s anonymous but there are many datapoints that could be used to deanonymize if the transaction parties are not extremely careful
Markets can’t see the product quality of a monopoly. It won’t be reflected in the metrics because there’s no competition to anchor the earnings to the real consumer value. But that doesn’t mean quality isn’t a factor- it makes them vulnerable to disruption.
Warren Buffett is known to trade on product quality (he buys what he uses). So his sale could be based on that.
He wasn’t claiming that he is. He was pointing out that people were scrambling to label him as being from “the other side”. The reality isn’t so binary.
I agree it could have been worded better but I think it’s clear if you watch it in context.
It’s not breaking the law in this case as far as I know.
The law requires Apple to provide equal access to the iPhone hardware and software in marketplaces that it competes in.
That can be done in a manner that is either additive, by providing access to third parties (which is potentially a significant expense and liability) or subtractive, by choosing not to engage in the regulated activities at all, in that jurisdiction.
As far as I understand, the act can’t control what Apple decides to do outside of the EU. Whether Apple has products or features available outside that market means nothing because it’s scoped to that jurisdiction.
I think that whether or not they built the thing does not matter.
If the consumers in EU don’t like the legal and predictable effects of the DMA in this case, how is Apple subverting the democratic process? If the act isn’t having the intended effect, then either voters will change their minds or it will need to be reformed. But this sounds like a successful outcome of the law insofar as preventing anticompetitive behavior.
Subverting democracy, to me, would involve things like dark money campaigns and lobbying.
Many seasonal campgrounds never open due to lack of staffing. Fire risk can’t be sufficiently managed and creates massive fuel buildups.
Illegal dumping at the edges of the national forests is also a big problem that they can’t keep up with, as well as preventing other illegal activities like poaching or unlawful harvesting of resourceg.