Do you trust the banking app installed from Aurora enough to do your online banking?
I don't, and I really wish there would be a decent way to verify that the installed/provided apps are legit. For me this is the biggest downside of using GrapheneOS, which I'm otherwise extremely happy with.
(for me, the whole point of using GrapheneOS is privacy and not sending data to Google, so using the PlayStore is not an option)
I'm pretty sure if I try calling my bank or searching the website to confirm the developer's public key fingerprint, there's not going to be any answer. You have to ask Google's servers to give you the APK and trust what it gives you, either via the front-end called Aurora or the front-end called Play Store
I think in general trust is established for Play Store apps by downloading the app with the Play Store on a phone with Google Certified Android. Then the app can get the signing key for storage in the database. Then this can be used to verify APKs downloaded outside the play store.
Maybe not in practice, but in theory, it works. I don't think there's a better way of handling this without relying on some centralised authority (Google) to validate the authorship of an app, which is hardly desirable.
(edit: sorry, re-reading your comment you were more directly referring to the AI companies and this context, I interpreted this more generally on my first glance)
The article reminds me on smart and competent people, that in addition to being smart lack the feeling for social norms and empathy. Yes, they tend to unnecessarily run into arguments and fights. Not because they are right, but because they are really insisting on being right. They are pushing the "enemy" into a corner where they would have to declare defeat in public and take the shame. Like animals, their opponents get very uneasy and aggressive in such a situation. People who watch this hate the "clever" person for not handling this more gracefully, and are afraid of being themselves caught in the corner the next time. You lost.
Without knowing the author personally its hard to tell, so this is just my hypothesis/thought.
I disagree on one point though: You don't have to stop arguing, you just should do it differently. You will really "win" when the other person thinks it was actually their own idea, or that you came to this conclusion together. You can do so by staying kind, humble and polite and guide the other person towards this revelation, and offer small thoughts and hints. If you have charisma you can be more direct, but such people are in a different league anyways.
The most important thing is staying friendly and kind. You will never convince or win people with an offensive "YOU ARE WRONG!" attitude.
It was very obvious that Trump is a highly corrupt and incompetent person at the second term election. His voters do not disappear when he is in prison, neither would the US reputation suddenly be way better. Who will these people elect next, why should anyone trust the US anymore?
Imprisonment would be a good starting point though. Together with education, regulation and reforming the political system. But this takes decades.
If Trump has learned anything, it is that the US is a lot easier to bully than others. He is convicted of a felony, he talks down to his own voters, abandons his biggest promises (repealing ACA and building a wall) and they still let him lead the country!
As bank I'd look into these 4.x % of loans where the machine learning disagrees.
This headline feels like 20 years old though, except for calling it "AI".
The theory is valid but too abstract to really point out where people lose something in return for what they've gained.
It's true that people can gain efficiency with specialization for example, but that's not necessarily a gain unless you define efficiency as the primary goal to be achieved.
This gained efficiency will then over time make this the most economical way to produce. This effectively harms everyone that hasn't adapted yet
It's just not an easy topic and claiming it is doesn't help whatsoever
This is a visualization tool of an IPCC study where you can compare various climate scenarios. All the data and publications are available there too:
https://hotspots-explorer.org/
By the way, it's quite hard to nail down what exactly a certain region will look like in 30 years. That depends a whole lot on the assumptions that you take.
The models used for such work (IPCC etc) are rather suitable to compare actions, e.g. "If we don't take measure X and Y now, then the average temperature in this region will be 0.7° higher 30 years from now, compared to taking that measure."
