Se votre argument était vrai, le Luxembourg, par exemple, n'aurait jamais dû participer d'un accord de livre échange incluant la France et l'Allemagne. Il ne s'agit pas de volume, il s'agit de compétitivité.

The issue must treated objectively. A good AI-authored report is better that a bad human-made report. Having been an active researcher (now retired) I read my share of awfully bad reports. I don't see where is the drama, until it is proved that AI-written reports are significantly more often wrong.

Si c'était vers les banques en difficulté ils n'y auraient vu aucun "artifice".

Qualquer um faz isso com um simples cortador de grama. Por favor, informem-se e parem de propagar esses mitos ridiculos.

This is FP3.

Clearly, Piastri tried to cross once Norris got the advantage. It was his job to see if there was enough space for that. There wasn't.

Incrível que grandes jornais brasileiros continuem publicando essas bobagens. No Brasil não ha distinção entre o sério e o people.

Presque aussi long que les vacances scolaires...

Well, at least not for miniaturization.

I fully agree.

My comment is of course not about banning books. But about the assumption that reading books is necessarily good. Not any book, not always. Without critical reading, books cannot do any good.

No, because I have read books that I did not agree with and it only reinforced in me that I didn't want to be like the people in those books. It isn't a book I would choose to read because of my personal values but I don't expect everyone to be the same as me. Banning books is a slippery slope

Current reading.

Current reading

Wouldn't you be afraid if someone is reading "Mein Kampf"?

More information:
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...