it should be reasonably expected that you can give a source and fix an error in the AI output.
I would even go as far as to say if a human directly told the AI "no, use 7.6 as the latest version", the AI should absolutely follow direct instructions no matter what it thinks is true. What if this human was working on a slide about the upcoming release of 7.6 that has no public documentation?
I do agree that Costco's can be laid out pretty differently and I get confused. My home Costco flows in a circle where you first see:
1. appliances/bedding/toothbrushes
2. alcohol
3. refrigerated foods with the bakery/meat department
4. cleaning products and flats of drinks
5. dry foods
when this cycle is broken or changed in a different Costco I am visiting, I feel VERY lost
In this case, Pepsi has reduced promotions and increased wholesale cost for "small groceries" which in this case was a regional grocer with ~1000 of stores across 10 states. If Pepsi is strong arming regional giants like that, imagine how the ant of a real local grocer feels. They are algorithmically getting destroyed
I think your definition of excellent and perfect teeth is in reality just "perfectly adequate" for their job of eating. If you don't care about the optics of your smile then sure, your body is going to find a way to place your teeth and jaw so you can still eat...
Mission statements are only there to resonate with people, so that part is working. If the mission doesn't make money, they aren't gonna do it just because it matches a statement
no repercussions from the government, yes, people should be free to write whatever they want