Google sat on transformers, LaMDA for years before OpenAI. The engineers and researchers did their job. This was a case of complete strategic, i.e., leadership failure because they were more worried about getting sued.
If anything this shows you can have a good work life balance culture and deliver groundbreaking results but get it all fcked up by sht leaders.
I feel like self driving cars is one area where Google's slow-and-steady culture just works better than the move-fast-and-break things culture, since the things that would break in this case are literal human bodies.
See that’s the thing, these culture gripes are never (that I’ve seen) accompanied by a cogent proposal for an alternative. It’s just: tear it down and let the market figure it out. But we already did that, and it was fucking awful, which is why there are systems borne of activist sympathies, imperfect as they are.
Yeah, two-parent households are really fantastic, and so is high-quality education. Which of those is more addressable via policy? Imploring people to have more durable relationships through child-rearing doesn’t seem like it’ll move the needle as much as broadening access to education which is almost totally controllable by policy.
Not having policies which penalize marriage would be a good start. For most people if they are "poor" being married means less access to benefits. The ACA / Obamacare is well known for it's marriage penalty but many other benefit programs have similar guidelines.
What percentage of failed or avoided marriages are due to such policies, do you reckon? Not opposed to your suggestion, but a path to national prosperity it is not.
The official government recognition of marriage is pretty divorced from having that relationship. If a couple is disadvantaged more than advantaged by official marriage, why would they not get a paper divorce but continue to live as a couple?
Someone should've suggested to them that they were originally meant to be disposed in a controlled manner via a
[Wrong] ~Russian vehicle that was delayed (they opted for uncontrolled reentry because the batteries were risky to keep around at the ISS, the controlled disposal vehicle was delayed and they had figured the batteries would be vaporized during reentry)~
Japanese vehicle, the crew for the disposal being delayed due to issues with a Russian vehicle, so they could instead blame the Russians in some manner. It'd be tricky to rephrase, but that hasn't stopped the media previously.
Luckily it wasn't SpaceX, else every mainstream outlet's headline would be some form of "Elon Musk, owner of Starlink, drops space debris onto unsuspecting Florida man, nearly kills son"
Close. They were meant to be disposed via controlled entry on a Japanese craft, but the astronauts that were going to do the work were delayed due to issues with Soyuz, and they couldn't keep the Japanese craft around indefinitely due to other conflicts.
Ah that makes much more sense! I recalled that it was Soyuz that was delayed, but had been thinking that if they were disposing they'd probably do it via Progress and so, was a bit confused. I remembered that the reason for the uncontrolled disposal was the Soyuz delay and just went with that.
If anything this shows you can have a good work life balance culture and deliver groundbreaking results but get it all fcked up by sht leaders.