"the government" is not one person with a concrete ideology, it is an amalgamation of hundreds of people who all want different things and are theoretically beholden to their voter base.
"The government", like any other large corporation, is an entity in and of itself, and not a mere aggregation of the people who run it. It has institutional culture etc, and given what it is, said institutional culture tends to lean heavily towards a highly centralized, hierarchical approach to anything it perceives as a problem; and tends to perceive anything that threatens the applicability of this approach as a problem in its own right.
The government in the US is not beholden to “the people”.
Because of the setup of the electoral college, 2 senator per state where RI has the same number of Senators as California and gerrymandering, it is very much about the will of the minority.
That’s not to mention all of the things that get done by unelected officials and judges with lifetime tenure.
AWS’s market position is deteriorating rapidly. They’re now at just over 30% of market share compared to 50% in 2018. Meanwhile the trend right now is big companies pulling their core infra out of the cloud and into their own datacenters. They also haven’t managed to launch a game-changing best-in-class service or feature in 5 years outside of maybe custom lambda runtimes.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this AI wave pushes azure into the forefront.
They're not doing fine as evidenced by the loss of value in their share price. AWS on its own isn't big enough, nor still growing enough, to justify a massive valuation anymore. And the web storefront is suffering too. Amazon simply isn't doing that well at the moment any way you look at it.
A school filled with wealthy families will always have solid readiness and test scores, just because the families can afford whatever help is needed. A quality school wouldn't just let underprivileged children slip through.
I agree with you that this is important on a societal level, but making such a vague, contentious, and poorly defined input, which individual schools have a questionable ability to influence, 33% of a school's overall rating is nonsensical.
Imagine a school with a 10 for equity, but a 6 for test scores and 5 for college readiness. It will get the same 7 rating as Berkeley High. Which would you rather send your kids to?
>Simple: I know that humans have intentionality and agency. They want things, they have goals both immediate and long term. Their replies are based not just on the context of their experiences and the conversation but their emotional and physical state, and the applicability of their reply to their goals.
This all seems orthogonal to reasoning, but also who is to say that somewhere in those billions of parameters there isn't something like a model of goals and emotional state? I mean, I seriously doubt it, but I also don't think I could evidence that.
Correct, but the problem is how you prove that for humans is by using the output and inferring that. You can apply the same criteria to ML models. If you don't, you need some other criteria to rule out that assumption for ML models.
For humans I can simply refer to my own internal state and look at how I arrive by conclusions.
I am of course aware that this is essentially a form of Ipse dixit, but I will do it anway in this case, because I am saying it as a human, about humans, and to other humans, and so the audience can just try it for themselves.
