I believe the argument would be that humans are inconsistent, fallible, and gameable in idiosyncratic and individual ways not that they are less susceptible than AI.
> “In the event that any payment or benefit by the Company (all such payments and benefits, including the payments and benefits under Section 3(a) hereof, being hereinafter referred to as the ‘Total Payments’), would be subject to excise tax, then the cash severance payments shall be reduced.”
> The paper offers this as a more understandable alternative, with the definition separated out:
> “In the event that any payment or benefit by the Company would be subject to excise tax, then the cash severance payments shall be reduced. All payments and benefits by the Company shall hereinafter be referred to as the ‘Total Payments.’ This includes the payments and benefits under Section 3(a) hereof.”
Would note that when drafting contracts, this is extremely natural to do. You notice you’re reusing a concept and so define it at first mention. Or you write something and later notice an ambiguity. Speaking as a non-lawyer who drafts things from time to time (to be reviewed by a lawyer).
Indeed, I find the original to be less ambiguous. Why does the second version refer to payments and benefits in the first sentence, and then give them a name in the second sentence?
In the revised version, I'm now very unclear whether Section 3a payments apply to the first sentence or not. The original makes it crystal-clear that they do; the revised version almost suggests they don't, since they were explicitly added to sentence 2 but not sentence 1.
They're often supreme Court cases over exactly this issue. Yeah varying definitions in different parts of legislation, which refer to different overlapping scopes or contacts. The court then goes to contextual clues for which reading is better supported. This can be the structural formatting of the legislation, public discourse of the legislature, or logical arguments. Overall, it's usually a mess.
Not just contracts, this is a variation of an "aside" and I've seen it often enough in books that it's normal to me. I do it pretty regularly in comments here, too.
> A gunman, who investigators tell CNN was waiting for some time before Thompson’s arrival, opened fire from 20 feet away firing multiple times, striking Thompson.
This from CNN makes it sound like it could possibly be targeted, though there are very few details at this time and sometimes these things are misreported in the immediate aftermath.
So .NET and C# have moved recently-ish to yearly single digit incremented releases and I’m guessing F# is doing the same. Not sure if they intentionally made the switch when it would line up with the .NET version or if that’s just a coincidence. C#, for example, released version 13 for .NET 9.
the UK has basically become the US by most metrics. This includes the increasing privatization of health services, transport, etc... and the excessive commodification of basic necessities like housing.
I find that saying that health initiatives don't work by vaguely gesturing at a country, is not a structurally sound argument. Its like the sentiment here is: "is the fact that we include Pizza as a vegetable in American schools part of the problem? Nooooo, that can't be it. it must be a moral issue!" and thats just one example.
The obesity problem in the US is tied directly to our relationship with highly processed (and CHEAP) food. Along with the stranglehold those companies have over state and federal institutions that allow them to directly sell these foods in schools and institutions, and heavily skirt FDA regulations via lobbying.
The US is uniquely bad when we have a ton of chemicals and ingredients in our foods that are banned in most other countries. It is largely a systemic problem and a problem that can easily be solved. Poorer people tend to eat cheap food, cheap processed food isn't well regulated and is directly tied obesity and a whole host of health problems.
The claim was about promotion, not effective promotion. (As a sibling comment points out, effective promotion is not unrealistic either. It won't happen on its own, but nothing does.)
