“Machine learning” is perfectly cromulent. The bias is what it learned, because that’s what it was taught. (Not intentionally, I don’t think. It’s just hard to get this stuff right sometimes.)
“Machine learning” is perfectly cromulent. The bias is what it learned, because that’s what it was taught. (Not intentionally, I don’t think. It’s just hard to get this stuff right sometimes.)
That’s the point, CO2 doesn’t store energy (well, it does a little, but not so much that it makes any difference). What it does is blocks the energy from leaving (until you reach a high altitude).
The way you were able to put it so simply makes me really wish that explanation was correct, but unfortunately it is not.
It’s more along the lines of:
Yeah, GDP really measures size rather than quality, people just end up ignoring the nuance.
GDP is also significant in that it directly influences how much revenue a government can raise by taxes, and so by proxy how much of public services it can provide. GDP growth also influences what amount of deficit it can sustain (though for various reasons that is not a straightforward relationship as with tax revenue).