What is STT in this context?

Speech to text

Seems like chronometers would be a case where two are better than one, because the mistakes are analog. If they don't exactly agree, just take the average. You'll have more error than if you were lucky enough to take the better chronometer, but less than if you had taken only the worse one. Minimizing the worst case is probably the best way to stay off the rocks.

And for breaking failures, two is way better than one! Having zero working chronometers would be bad.

And come to think of it, if the two chronometers are wrong in different directions, then the average could be more accurate than either of them.

It's also possible that they simply went ahead and hit the vehicle, knowing there was a good chance that their target would be inside. It's not like they've been all that picky about collateral damage.

Why risk starting a war and not be 100% confident where the leader is?

Risk starting a war !!

That was the whole freaking point.

The attacking forces doesn't give a flying F about Iranians otherwise the sanctions would have been removed long ago on humanitarian reasons.

Most wars are started without targeting the leader at all.

And since perhaps a source would be helpful, here's the research saying climate change is having a significant effect:

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2023gl10...

BBC reporting:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20240524-severe-turbulenc...

The US did have deflation in the fourth quarter of 2008:

https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/economics/deflation

Of course this is talking about the overall price level. The prices in specific sectors can fluctuate independently of that. Food and energy in particular are excluded from core inflation because they're especially volatile.

Honestly, when I read your first sentence, given the lack of a capital H, my brain initially went the same direction the AI did. Then I realized what you meant but since I already went there, I might have made a similar response as a joke. For the sake of my ego I'm forced to reject your claim that this is evidence of stupidity.

One method would be to use the same key that you use to hold some cryptocurrency, so if you share then you risk losing a bond.

Of course it's not ideal to make everybody hold crypto just to use online services, but maybe we can approximate that in other ways. Say, have the private data include name/SSN/DOB and maybe a credit card number, require the user to enter that stuff (or have browser do it), prover checks that it's all correct. Combine that with a challenge/response so proofs can't be reused. User can't share credentials without risking identity theft. Downside is more openings for local malware to succeed in identity theft, but maybe that's better than sending full credentials to big juicy central locations.

A third option would be to give everyone a hardware key that's hard to copy, but that would get expensive.

I think the best idea is to just skip age verification and keep the good ol' internet we've enjoyed for decades.

We go through a lot of single-use plastics.

And unless GP has a security clearance, they can't know for sure what OpenAI is allowing on classified networks.

SpaceX is currently on a streak of over 300 successful Falcon missions in a row. I'm not convinced their approach isn't compatible with risk aversion.

They push their test rockets to failure and learn from what goes wrong. That seems to be a pretty good process for getting a solid production rocket.