CGMthrowaway

Missing one of my favorite in USA which I will not mention here because it is unofficially open to the public and i don't want that to change...

The folly is thinking that getting hiring right is the solution at all.

As has been pointed out a) leaders matter, b) the difference in impact between great and mediocre/poor leadership is massive, c) even if you hire a great leader you can get poor results.

It follows then that spending more effort to find just the right person is not enough. You must also examine your overall organizational culture, your investors culture, your unspoken assumptions about the goals of your organization, etc etc.

And yes great leaders do all of this - of course - it becomes obvious upon reading my comment. But the point is great leaders doing this is not enough. The organization must be on the same page. You can lead a horse to water etc etc. And yes the leader can "Re-organize" but at that point you may find yourself faced with throwing the baby out with the bathwater unavoidably.

Leaders are necessary. And hiring is hard. But there is no one golden calf like "hire the perfect leader" that will solve a problem.

As with most things worth doing: you have to do it. Doing it is hard. And you might still not get the results you want.

this is all downstream of structural incentives

You are mostly right and the structural incentives are more related at root to unsustainable national debt than any legislative choice (unless that's what you were referring to)

At age 22, FLW was specially trained, working at the equivalent of a frontier AI lab (the most important architect in Chicago) and in the most booming city at the time (Chicago, especially where construction was concerned- due to the Great Fire rebound)

He's not a random, there are a lot of factors working for him

TLDR, use lime mortar not portland cement. And don't use rebar.

Also- modern concrete is not waterproof... requires sealant

FLW created the times

Is it useful? No

Seems like it might have some use thwarting Ring/Flock/etc cameras within a specific proximity.

It's giving major "They Live" vibes.

Salmon canning in Alaska was many people's ticket/gateway to that romantic state. If you were a climbing or ski bum or fishing bum type of guy, it was a great but grueling gig that would grant you access to the best outdoors spots in the world.

Salmon canning was also a gateway to getting on board the crab boats (Deadliest Catch boats), which was another dream for many a young man, and where you could make real money (even more grueling) - and have plenty of leisure to boot.

How about

10x stronger than the jaw of a dog

20x stronger than a human jaw

as strong as the jaws of a great white shark

?

If anything he would be for tightening it, but I suspect his role is less about being a vote one way or the other.

The value he brings is in his data, knowledge & analyses - which he surely has from the Fed - on the scope and extent of AI's potential rrisks in capital sustainability, market stability and wage/job displacement

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/policytools.ht...

Not quite.

"Notably, in 1974, Federal Reserve chair Arthur Burns felt it necessary to make clear that high nominal interest rates would need to continue “for a time” as an anti-inflation measure;"

"A later chair, Paul Volcker, having presided over a period of very restrictive monetary policy, chose in March 1982 to make an explicit indication that nominal interest rates would and should fall in the period ahead."

https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2021033pap...

Greenspan himself coined the term "Fed speak"

A major reason why the new Fed chair is refusing to provide forward guidance, in a major departure from all(?) previous Fed chairs and will likely require textbooks to be rewritten.

At first blush this seems quite a bit less ham-handed than "net zero by 2030" type of goals, so that could be a good thing.

I would be more surprised if they DIDN'T have anyone assessing the risk of an AI bubble. The report deals with characterizing how deeply embedded in the broader economy AI companies are, and the risks of heavy infrastructure investment, concentrated market power, reliance on private financing and potential shocks like supply chain disruptions, geopolitical tensions and electricity shortages. What is the issue (if any)?

What is a splat? What is the significance of this website?

There is a minimum intrusiveness required by law, though. One could even say it's intrusive by design, depending on your perspective

Don't rule out another Cash for Clunkers. The 2009 program destroyed 1 in 300 cars on the road. The next one could be bigger. Also, 3 in 4 cars on the road today are now in states requiring emissions tests for your annual registration, which can pose a significant (and growing, as standards improve) obstacle for older cars.

Eye tracking

Yes. Even conceding every point made in this article, RCTs are still the gold standard. The article points out that RCTs are often impractical, expensive or ethically challenging. Well, so is the gold standard of anything.

OP suggests that alternative methods like target trial emulation, propensity scoring and double machine learning can be used to approximate the conditions of an RCT using existing data. In saying so he gives away the tell, which is that RCTs are the standard being aspired to.

Observational data may well be undervalued. But RCTs are still the gold standard.

Competing with the SAT (58% market share) there is also the ACT (42%) and CLT, and competing with the AP (90%?) there is IB (10%?), so it's not clear how College Board is a "monopoly"

Far less than a majority. I believe that is the whole point

I did not realize the egg crisis was found to be price fixing operation.

As I recall during the whole thing the news was non-stop about how it was related to broad-based inflation, chicken culling for avian flu, etc. Seems like all that was a lie, or at least merely a half-truth.

Connect, show your own commitment, size for success their requested commitment, leave them an out.

https://www.wired.com/story/the-trump-white-house-is-over-an...

it seems nobody is enforcing consumer protections like they used to.

This is one of the benefits Realtors(tm) and other licensing boards (lawyers etc) like to tout - we have a code of ethics, we self-regulate, you are safer with them than with Joe Agent, blah blah. You see how that goes.

"Broken borders" is an oxymoron. Something we cannot tolerate. Borders, by their nature, are our definition as a nation and our protection as a country. Broken borders do not exist. We cannot tolerate them. Strong border control must be part and the first part of any comprehensive immigration reform. It's the obligation of our elected officials to keep the American people safe, and our borders are one of our early lines of defense to do that. It used to be our first and only line of defense, but in this age of technology, more is possible.

I used to live in a state where some new friends had told us about places that facilitated pregnant women's trips to the US solely for the purpose of staying and giving birth in the US so the child could become citizens. They then head home. I have no idea how prevalent this is.

As many as 26,000 mothers do it (birth tourism) every year.

CIS analyzed U.S. Census Bureau data to track the number of foreign-born mothers who gave birth in the United States. Researchers cross-referenced those births against federal figures of temporary visitors. They isolated foreign mothers who arrived on short-term visas, gave birth, and did not establish long-term residency in the U.S. CIS concluded that 20,000 to 26,000 births annually are attributable to women arriving on short-term tourist visas specifically to obtain citizenship for their children.

"absent a constitutional amendment"