My friend, a lawyer dealing with loads of legal questions related to AI, says that this headlong embrace of AI without safeguards is proof that not enough people read sci-fi!

The Expos were my team, and losing them was such a bummer. I don't know that they could financially work now though any better than they could when they transferred.

It might have changed recently and may also depend on the type of package, but in my experience, UPS has the worst fees of them all.

On top of tariffs, UPS tends to add on outrageous brokerage fees for having paid the duties for you (because they know we're stuck and can't easily clear it ourselves). In my experience, UPS's cut was sometimes bigger than actual customs duties (at least on small purchases)

No, they just didn't accept the delivery yet. If you accept delivery, you are responsible for all those fees.

Grenell's specialty is pissing off people and acting like he was born in a barn so this all tracks. When he was sent to Germany as ambassador during the 1st Trump term, he managed to piss off the Germans on the first days by threatening them. I have no doubt he sends insane emails.

Yes, those are questions to ask as you review graphs and data. I was trying to say though that good data collection and analysis are possible so we should not approach this as if all stats are subjective and garbage. But yes, people with questionable intentions can masquerade as legit with stats

That's not a fair assessment. Yes, stats can be manipulated because some people employ questionable research practices (QRPs). Guidelines to avoid QRPs exist, and good researchers will analyze and report data in a transparent manner where others can assess the validity of their conclusions.

I teach at a university, and struggle with how enthralled some ppl, whether faculty, students or support staff, are with LLMs. LLMs have their uses, probably in targeted ways. Some data (so far) point to using LLMs as potentially having negative impact on higher level cognition.

The Y-axis says "Total violence rate (sum of cities)". I honestly thought they just added rates, but maybe you are right that that it is total of incidences (which they them divided by total number of cities?!?). Regardless of how they did, it is wacky and utterly meaningless stat.

This is the kind of chart I show my students in introductory stats to develop their ability to critically evaluate graphs! Even though this is not the kind of data I tend to look at, it has the hallmarks of questionable metrics. Sum of cities? You can't add up rates of crimes in different places. 😂

What bunch of ghouls. I'm so sorry you had to deal with that.

This is one of the most professional dressing-downs I've read. As someone who has to grade papers for a living, I definitely relate to the feeling that all your instructions were ignored and you're professionally forced to use cognitive energy to make sense of and render a verdict on utter BS.

Nobody was going on and on. This was just a really poorly conceived bit. What is the point of an award ceremony being televised if not to see people being happy and thank their coworkers and families? Otherwise, might as well just publish a list of winners and be done with it.