Satya Nadella has given an evasive answer there and both Zuckerberg and the journalists have been taken in.
It is common in programming languages that have a lot of boilerplate to use code generation, where you take some information about data and generate code automatically, like code that translates data between formats (for example reading and writing xml for saving to disk or json to send over the network). Being very routine to write and easy to deduce logically from other information, this process has been automated for years and years, long before AI existed.
Microsoft's flagship software such as operating systems, office software, is unbelievably vast and complex, far beyond the complexity of most business software, and has been developed over decades. They absolutely have not replaced 30% of their code since the very recent advent of useful AI. I can believe that 30% of it is automatically generated, but not by AI.
Trump will use any tariff profits to bail out farmers and other industries impacted
I remember when UK right wing lying populist Boris Johnson (who only really cares about himself) promised to bail out farmers and other industries adversely affected by his insane isolationist Brexit policy.
Here's US right wing lying populist Donald Trump (who only really cares about himself) and you think he's gonna bail out farmers and other industries adversely affected by his insane isolationist global trade war policy?
But billionaires are so desperately unlike the office worker. You know, how if someone took your penny, you wouldn't worry. And in fact they could take a penny from you every day for three years and now you're down a whole ten dollars but it just simply isn't an issue. You know that a thousand times as much as you've lost will be turning up in the next few months. That's how billionaires relate to a million dollars. A million. It'll show up for them in the next month or two. They're not worried. Why would they worry about money? You don't worry about pennies, they don't worry about millions. Stop thinking that billionaires worry about money.
Now if the entire global capitalist system were to completely crumble, then that's an issue, but that's absolutely not what's happening. Billionaires are almost incomprehensibly wealthy and a crash of 10% just doesn't matter. At all. There are other countries than the USA and they'll absolutely leave if necessary. They spend plenty of time in their overseas properties anyway for tax purposes. Borders are for ordinary people.
Yes. They do. And they're right. They'll be fine. Billionaires will be absolutely fine. The stock market crash doesn't worry them. Not even a little bit.
They're still incomprehensibly richer than millionaires in the same way that someone with an office job, a flat, a TV, games console and a car who goes out to eat on the regular is incomprehensibly richer than someone who lives under a piece of sheet metal next to a rubbish tip and scavenges for food.
Vast swathes of the USA is accessible by navigable river ever since the Louisiana purchase. It's one of the three main original reasons the USA was so powerful economically before Trump.
Billionaires will be absolutely fine if they never make another penny and even if they lose 99% of their money in some stock market complete and final death. Millionaires are worried, but they aren't the ones with the real power.
Yup. Americans. This is the day you find out that in the future this'll happen to you if you complain about Trump in too public a way or in front of the wrong person. Who does trump hate more than immigrants? People who disagree with him.
They're were a lot of men who insisted on immediate medical attention who got told that their partners had tried that and absolutely nothing would come of it.
You're absolutely correct, but Donald Trump dgaf about the constitution, at most he sees it as an inconvenience, something that other people have to do or something to wave like a flag, not something for him personally to actually obey. And the scotus has no intention whatsoever of holding him to it.
Article points out that having a moral issue over porn is a much, much stronger prediction of perceiving problems than levels of use. The headline writer and introduction conclude that porn addiction isn't real, but I think the detail of the article suggests more that behaviour only really gets properly out of control in the presence of self-disapproval.
I think a more consistent summary for that content is "Mainly only religious people seek help from psychologists for what they perceive as porn addiction, but overwhelmingly their behaviour doesn't fit the professional thresholds for addiction".
They think free speech means no one is allowed to disagree with them. Otherwise they say their right to free speech is being violated.