They were talking about warehouse workers, not corporate employees.

No rank and file US-based employees at Amazon are getting years of severance. They don't do that.

Is the criticism that they told drivers about how the Idaho stop worked? If the Idaho stop was going to be more widely adopted, it's a reasonable assumption that there would be a public education campaign so people knew what to expect.

Either way though, it's a study meant to test a hypothesis and the outcome suggested that Idaho's approach may be a good one.

If you're wanting an admission that the study's results may not hold up under further testing, sure. Admitted. But the study as a first step is pretty reasonable.

Kirkland anything (nearly anyway)

Firefox can do without Google being the default fine. What they can't do without is all the money that Google pays them to make Google be the default.

He may have PTSD and he may have had 1,000 hours of firearms training, but if you empty your magazine the way he did, under the circumstances he did, you're incompetent to be a police officer. Period.

And even he apparently recognizes that since he resigned (though whether he'll just go get hired the next town over is probably a decent bet).

It's a race to the bottom.

Yes, you can decline to opt in, but the guy next to you (or the guy next to him) will opt in and sell his AI voice package for less than it costs to employ a real person. And unlike a real person, the AI voice package can work 24/7 on 10,000 productions at the same time.

If anyone can opt in, then no one can really opt out.

Is this a good thing? For the bottom line of the people making the games, sure. And maybe 3% of that savings will trickle down to the consumer.

But it's pretty bad for the voice actors.

The board has given no real reasoning for why they fired him. Until they do, there's no reason anyone should consider this anything other than an internal power struggle that resulted in a coup.

And Sam didn't have a job anymore. Why shouldn't he go work for Microsoft? He was pushed out of OpenAI, is he contractually bound to never do something different?

There's something in the article about auto-delete policies.

If those policies violated a recordkeeping requirement maybe a jury could infer it was done intentionally in furtherance of a crime

Or maybe even if it was set to auto delete messages after some really unusually short period. By that I mean if you configured it to delete messages after a few days it might be hard to explain the legitimate business purpose served by such a rule.

The real scam is that that video is 15 min long.

Indicted in 2016 on witness coercion and the case is still "pending"...? Can I be forgiven for thinking there was no intent on ever bringing that to trial?

I live 11 miles from work and it takes me 30-40 min to drive in. 50 miles could be 90-120 min easy.