simonsarris

Just following the law, you mean, in the countries he is visiting.

That seems wildly incorrect. In the US the bottom 50% are closer to ~3% of federal taxes.

The top 1% pay about 38%. The top 0.1% is simply not a lot of people and not helpful for thinking about how much you can juice them in absolute dollar amounts.

You are bending a word to mean things it has never in its entire history meant. There is absolutely nothing intrinsic about democracy that protects minorities.

There is nothing intrinsic to democracy that means you need to have a constitution. This should be obvious since many democratic states and organizations have no constitution! The UK has no formal constitution, neither does Israel. Canada also has no single constitution document. There are probably lots of non-democracies out there that have constitutions. It's completely orthogonal to whether or not a place is a democracy.

Medium and long term I expect this to become the default enterprise choice, simply because Google will avoid faux pas, scandals, or reputational hazards of competitors (like Meta). I could be wrong of course, but like Apple signing up for Gemini I think its how how most biggish deals will go.

they don't require 30 years saved up, only showing (somehow) that you will be able to generate such a pension equivalent over time. I suspect that will be very squishy in practice.

The more welfare you have, the better of an idea this is. An aging country especially cannot afford to risk more wards of the state.

> and have enough money banked to live off of for 30 years

It's a confusing guideline but this isn't accurate. You need to show an expected future pension (could be savings) equivalent to a salaried worker who paid into an employee's pension for 30 years. That's strict, but there will probably be a bunch of ways to show that.

That does not, in itself, suggest they are a supply chain risk. It might label them a national security risk. And you might have your own creative definitions of every word related to supply chains. But we are talking about supply chain risks as the US Gov understands them.

These are just very different things. OAI "hacking" anything isn't OAI telling the US Gov what they can and cannot do with their product. Maybe along all kinds of axes, one is more alarming than the other, but it's a canard in this topic.

I think you're playing dumb on purpose here but in general yes, you are missing out on all the friends and connections and interesting conversations you have not made. I don't know what those are for you, but they're transparently obvious for me in the counterfactual, and a lot of people on the site.

You can't imagine a more useful Roomba?

I think for safety reasons, we won't want any home robots to be very strong. Just precise.