|
|
|
|
|
|
by happymellon
13 days ago
|
|
|
Yes, and it was completely crap. Stopping at 2024 might be reasonable because you don't have data for 2025 and the current state of 2026, but it leaves a massive hole in AI affected time frames. There was absolutely nothing there that could even imply that AI isn't the current problem for young unemployment. It's like saying that your data only goes up to 1700s, so therefore global climate change is probably more affected by the Boston Tea Party than industrialisation. |
|
|