> It's not being aggressive, it's just trying throwing shit at problems until it sticks... or doesn't.
The vast majority of the work the agent did was to reproduce the issue using the limited tooling it had access to. I don't see how that qualifies as "just trying throwing shit at problems until it sticks"
Aside from the confusing conflation of sums and rates mentioned in other replies, your argument assumes that correlations are transitive and exhaustive—i.e., that because socioeconomic status correlates with crime, any group with lower crime must have higher socioeconomic status. Which of course is invalid because correlations do not compose across variables, and crime is multi-causal
>She said they presented no proof to back up their claims that the government had pressured social media companies like Twitter and Facebook into restricting their speech. “Unfortunately,” she said, the Fifth Circuit court of appeals “relied on factual findings that are “clearly erroneous.”
Those next two sentences from your article seem to contradict your assertion that it was because it wasn't Facebook that brought the case.
I was surprised. I wasn't expecting a major tech company who's website is plastered with things about "valuing diversity" to be one to pick a fight over a such a minor requirement in a gender equality law.
I had a laptop with a similar amd cpu and even though it was rated for the same wattage, it was a lot more inefficient. The laptop would get warm just watching youtube videos and the fans would always kick on.
In contrast to the M1 which is so efficient that Apple doesn't even put a fan in it on its lower end models, and it still barely gets warm.
The vast majority of the work the agent did was to reproduce the issue using the limited tooling it had access to. I don't see how that qualifies as "just trying throwing shit at problems until it sticks"