People always mention the direct foreign aid but fail to mention all the other money flows. They receive many times more money each year in private investment and open trade agreements. I believe the figure is close to 90-100 billion USD each year going to Israel from the US. This doesn’t include the free movement of Americans to Israel for tourism, owning a second home, etc.
This isn’t being realistic. The major benefit of these is peer review. You aren’t going to have enough people to peer review the work of a massively open and public publication system.
On top of that the chance of finding something as you suggest becomes that much more difficult. Smaller findings get published now in a more controlled scenario and get lost in the stream.
Major journals are a net positive for surfacing important science.
Yet "peer review" would absolutely scale if it were actually the review of peers (and not just an editorial board). A large number of publications where submissions are reviewed by previous and prospective authors would be much like how open source peer review works, though not without its own set of issues.
Discovery is a search problem and its pretty clear that we have the technical capacity to solve that problem if there is enough of a signal from wide-spread peer review.
Major journals become those that re-publish and report on the big debates and discoveries of the actually peer-reviewed journals and this would be the work of "journalists".
Peer-review can also occur from non-gatekeepers, from non-experts. You realize you posted this on a massively open and public publication system, right?
Non-experts sometimes bring perspectives that gatekeepers are blind to.
“You could always make an argument” and people did. And I would say this isn’t a surprising finding but it is important. Assessing direct impact almost always is because it makes realities more plain.
I wouldn’t say linear algebra is a necessity to being a computer scientist. At least, not the full linear algebra content. Knowing matrix math is enough.
It's not completely necessary. But I will say, as someone who began their career as an 18 year old "self-taught developer" then completed a CS degree at 30, I found linear algebra to be the most useful bit of knowledge that was missing from my kit.
You seem very confused by this in your comments. Did you read the article? The Swiss government was found to be out of line with its own policies and laws.
The ECHR is very obviously writing brand new legislation here, completely outside of the democratic process. The argument of “well that’s good because I think the democratic process should have already created this legislation” is simply anti-democratic.
The ECHR rules that Switzerland has failed to meet its treaty obligations WRT climate action. IE, there's been an internal failure by Switzerland's government and courts to enforce its own legislation and treaty obligations. So, these women took the next step - an international court (to which Switzerland is a party - if the Swiss don't like it, they should vote to abandon their obligation to the ECHR).
It’s a multi generational issue. It’s not a question of fair when the repercussions for not addressing it are massive. Younger generations know this. It’s too bad older generations did nothing to address the issues they saw in front of them. They were too selfish
I also think it’s preposterous to put climate change at their feet
I can see people using AI for setting up simple solutions. But AI, as it currently is, is dependent on human innovation to be able to generate results. Any novel problem will need human minds. On top of this AI is currently horrendous at coding things with complexity. Maybe some higher complexity solutions can get done with high cognitive tax in human prompt input, but there are serious diminishing returns on that.
AI still needs major breakthroughs to get to that point. And when it does it might very well have outpaced humans in a multitude of academic fields. Including the ones listed by Jensen Huang (the sciences).
