> executing a health insurance CEO on broad daylight is not just widely approved but widely beloved.

An Axios poll showed 17% found the murder "acceptable" or "somewhat acceptable." Curious where you are seeing such wildly different numbers?

https://www.axios.com/2024/12/17/united-healthcare-ceo-killi...

> An Axios poll showed 17% found the murder "acceptable" or "somewhat acceptable."

That poll is across the whole population. Among the younger generations, particularly the "terminally online"? A whole different story.

Younger, terminally online people are largely degenerates. You’re just being sensationalist.

I mean, 17% as a whole. But when you have the younger generations going as high as 40% saying that murder was acceptable (and note the question phrasing here is about as negatively charged as it can get) you surely have to see the disconnect here.

Regional police and fire here post wildfire updates and accompanying rural road closures on twitter.

Me: Give me a list of 30 minute podcasts ...

Gpt3something:

The first one has 90 minute episodes! 30 minutes only!

> As it extrapolates the current financial information and performance there is an implied assumption that the present financial environment will not change significantly in the future.

Yes, but their "run rate" assumes the current level continues unchanged, right? If revenue per month goes down then the projected run rate is optimistic. However, revenue has been increasing, so the reported run rates have underestimated revenue.

I think the better question is how much more than $65B/year revenue they need to cover what they are spending on capex and model development. I would bet money their revenue in the next year is over $75B (vs $65B), but also that their amortized costs exceed their revenue.

I think their capex will exceed their revenue, but $65B is a lot to spend on training runs!

I suspect it's more likely they will spend the extra money on hardware and infrastructure (data centers) either directly or via suppliers.