>People will excuse anything when it suits them

i am not sure what you are intending to imply. what suits me and how?

i called it boring. flip on a news channel, click any other link on the front page here, or look outside and you will find something more interesting than "app sends a lot of requests to google".

that doesnt mean i think it is good or that i am making an excuse. it means that it is boring. this site is supposed to "optimize for curiosity" or however dang phrases it.

You could counter multipayload missiles by hitting the missile earlier in its trajectory before the payloads deploy, that was the plan for MIRV nukes but it requires usually forward interceptors or perhaps energy weapons we don't yet have.

Hm, Iran destroyed several of the radars used for seeing their missiles in the early stages of their trajectory.

Hitting Ballistic missiles "Midcourse" as you suggest requires interceptors that look more like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-Based_Interceptor or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_3

It is.... Entirely infeasible to deploy these against tactical ballistics like Iran is using.

Israel seems to be using Arrow 3s for this exact effect. If we are to believe the news, the Arrow 3s hit bomblet arme missiles attacking Dimona ( after the one that got through)

He joked about Palantir killing people. I know Israel and the US have been using some sort of Palantir system for target designation and that speaks for itself.

Palantir's Maven AI targeting system misidentified an Iranian girl's school as a legitimate military target, killing around 170 innocent children.

Citation is desirable here.

Not for Jared Kushner and I expect he's not the only one.

I haven't read it fully but it doesn't seem to be promoting any sort of falsehoods. As an American I consider any reliance on Starlink and the thoroughly compromised Elon Musk to be a weakness rather than a strength.

So, you disagree with the paper and think what the Pentagon did with Anthropic is right.

The paper argues that the militarization of space is inevitable. I agree based on it being a self-fulfilling prophecy by paranoids and not the charming type.

A responsible company develops an informed user group they can test new changes with and receive direct feedback they can take action on.

A big tech company has ~10k experiments running at once. Some engineers will be kicking off a few experiments every day. Some will be minor things like font sizes or wording of buttons, whilst others will be entirely new features or changes in rules.

Focus groups have their place, but cannot collect nearly the same scale of information.

I think a lot of people (myself included) would just like to not be constantly part of some sort of revenue optimization effort.

I don't care, at all, about the "scale of information" for the company's sake.

Often the experiments are not for revenue - many of them will be optimizing user experience metrics - ie. Load time or user dropoff rate.

They are clearly good for both user satisfaction and the companies bottom line.

As someone who works in these orgs, only a small fraction are about user experience metrics. 90+% are extracting more short term value with unknown second order effects on usability.

Big tech companies are not serving their "users" but advertisers, it's a common mistake.

If you have 10k experiments running then you are probably p-hacking.

Billionaires don't seem to create anything new when they're billionaires. You look at companies like Google or Meta and they acquire companies and teams but what sort of truly successful projects and products did they create from whole. It seems like a string of failures, canceled projects and lackluster product offerings to me.

If we can tell poor people how to behave for their own good then we can certainly help billionaires out too by taxing them back to creativity.

Tortoise have been observed righting other tortoise that have become stuck. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/DZ57D608fiM (two tortoises helping a third) this has a terrible voiceover but you get the idea

I would only add that young people or anyone should be able to afford to live alone as you say OR opt to live with roommates to share expenses and save and build wealth. It shouldn't be necessary for anyone working 40 hours a week to pool their resources with other people in similar situations simply to survive.