The source is linked in his post. Did you not read the article? You should provide another source or address the data in the article instead of just asserting it's false with zero argument.
There must be a disconnect between viewers and critics, because viewership declined over its entire run. Compare that with a true masterpiece like Breaking Bad which saw viewership consistently increase over the course of its run.
While we don't know the specifics of the arrangement (under what circumstances Microsoft can back out of the deal), I'm sure they can make it challenging for OpenAI to continue operating at scale when they're reliant on funding (most of the 10+ billion dollars hasn't been transferred yet) and access to unlimited compute. This makes them stakeholders even if they don't have seats on the non-profit's board.
Microsoft obviously doesn't want to pull the plug on OpenAI, which is why they're pressuring the board to rehire Sam. If the board was truly independent and didn't answer to any other stakeholders, why would they even be talking to Sam right now?
I don't get why this line is repeated so much. Verbal agreements and reassurances in the realm of foreign policy are essentially worthless, especially when you're dealing with democratically elected leaders. Unless you have a formal agreement the next president or prime minister has to abide by, there is no continuity.
This expansion argument also ignores that Eastern European countries are joining NATO of their own accord.
Btw Russia and the US also signed the Budapest memorandum to respect Ukraine's sovereignty.
65% of Brazil's energy is coming from hydropower, which is extremely reliable, but geography dependent. When people make that statement, they're usually referring to wind + solar, which are intermittent.
If I recall correctly, being imprisoned during trial makes conviction more likely and sentencing tends to be harsher. Seeing the defendant in prison garb biases the judge and the jury.
Because interest rates were historically low for the entirety of YT’s existence until recently. You’re seeing this happen with multiple platforms and companies suddenly caring way more about being profitable.
The fundamental problem of intellectual property is that it protects the interests of large corporations far more than those of small creators. IP only matters if you have the resources to defend it in court or if your content isn't worth the effort to steal.
I don't see why "migration, driven by economic opportunities" is a bad thing. Socioeconomic mobility is tied heavily to where you live (proximity to economic centers). I doubt all or even most of the new residents are tech workers. Plenty of working class people come from all around the country move to California or New York. I think the failure to build housing not only disenfranchises those people but also lower / middle income families already living in the area.
I find it odd how people can be pro-immigration and anti-migration. Keeping people out of your community is similar to keeping people out of your country.
Dealbreaker for Mastodon (that I've seen multiple people mention) is that instance admins can view personal DMs. Yes, employees from major social media companies can view your private messages, but it's more likely there's an audit trail in those cases while Mastodon instances have minimal oversight.
I wouldn't say it's thoroughly debunked or rigorously researched. More studies need to be done. Decision fatigue is also a slightly different concept from ego depletion.