You're muddling the line between democracy and dictatorship.
In a democracy if you control all the votes of people you should be able to make changes in the government that the incumbent may not want. You can't do this in Iran.
How are you sure about this? What evidence or statistics do you have that there have been enough people who want an alternative that is sufficiently different? It appears the regime is great at persuading people they want some sort of "light reform" and propagandized the populace to hate taking a risk for real change. It appears lots of people talk the talk but are comfortable where they are and in fact resist change when it happens. Otherwise you should have seen some level of unrest given the lack of water and electricity and the regime at its weakest.
Vice versa, how sure are you about it being true in other countries? Looking at various elections in parliamentary systems like Germany, France, or Canada, it does appear that even a strong opposition has a really hard time competing with the status quo in a "democratic" setup. The system resorts to all trickery including importing voters and creating unnatural coalitions to enforce the establishment agenda. And that is not including physical elimination of the opponent which was attempted in the United States.
I wonder why people focus so much on insurance companies, given their relatively small profit margins. The more glaring issue seems to be provider costs, which are several times higher than comparable services in other countries, with little variance. Are we suffering from a shortage of medical schools? Or from a lack of competition among medical device manufacturers?
The same people who cited Wikipedia instead of its sources are probably the same people who cite AI instead of its sources. New scope for people with a stick.
This is incompetent use of AI and the news related to it are becoming tiring. The result is that whenever I talk to some people outside the tech circle they just undeniably believe that AI will never be commonplace in high stakes situations, which is just a rapidly moving bar.
> The result is that whenever I talk to some people outside the tech circle they just undeniably believe that AI will never be commonplace in high stakes situations
And, I mean, they're probably right, because, well, see the pillow guy's lawyer.
The most important thing to understand about AI is that people (not you, I'm sure, but the majority) will use it incompetently and unquestioningly.
These stories are important, you personally don't have to read them if you're tired. But the more cases there are the bigger the extant threat, and the more we need to be educated so we can defend against it.
We are all going to be affected by the omnipresent reliance on AI that allows people to rush out their tasks and get home from work sooner.
To be precise, shapes are inside the measurable space of the random variable and the rectangle can be a cube or hypercube based on the number of variables