The US government system was set up to be better than the monarchies its designers had grown up under. In this sense it has been wildly successful. But... it wasn't really designed to scale to the size it has, nor to account for the massive changes in technology that have occurred since it was written.
The leaders of the time decided to replace the first attempt only 6 years after it was ratified, and I believe they fully expected any future government to do the same if they found the current system wasn't working. They did try to make the new system more adaptable by adding the Amendment process, which was frankly genius and unprecedented in government systems prior to that.
I think it's very important to remember where and when the system we have came from, and to try to think like the people who wrote it, and to remember that at the time they had no other models for successful government beyond the writings of Enlightenment-period historians. It's very easy to criticize the current system. It's far more difficult (and substantially more important) to draft a better system.
What? there's nothing important in Pine Gap.
Even the Pentagon doesn't know where they are!
birdcage
chain gang
shot box
rollin' rusty
grateful tread
chained to the wheel
"grill marks, bud"
cage against the machine?
Even if I did choose the company I applied to for work, I didn't choose my coworkers, nor did I get to meet them until after I was hired. And, I certainly don't get to choose the customers I have to interact with during my work.
Counterpoint: you can have high-quality human contact with people you choose to be around, not so much with people you're paid to be around.
Or just reinstalls it in the next update.
That is super not how fair use works:
Considering that OpenAI is making a commercial profit from developing its ML models, they seem to have missed #1 already. #3 also because the model usually ingests the entire work, not just part of it.
Actually, this makes me wonder if the design of OpenAI's business structure is intended to try to abuse this:
So, the "non-profit" part of OpenAI collects the data for "research" purposes, but then the for-profit side sells the product.