monkeydreams
This is a great experiment. Do some world building offline about Smergle the Keen finding the Hoopla of Kynashiusous. Then ask ChatGPT what reagents would have been more effective in breaking through the borantiastic door than squeeble stomach juices.
Of course we know the answer - it will either drop into a 'I have only been trained on data before blah blah blah' or 'I cannot talk about current world leaders' or 'I have not been trained on your hackneyed and unpublished romantasy saga, why don't you tell me about it?'
On the other hand, if it is aware of the general concepts of your concept, and has bridging concepts for related topics it has been trained upon, it might try to apply the general concepts to a specific but different scenario.
Even if the worst happens in the AI market some uses will still remain. Far fewer, I suspect, than will be demand the computational capacity of all the DCs popping up everywhere.
The goal of LLM's, as they are marketed now, is to drive engagement and stickyness of products. A wrong answer is brushed off with a "Hey, you're right, let's try that again" - a response purposely designed to maximise the friendliness of the system and minimise the sting of a wrong answer. The fact that an LLM will not respond to the same question in the same way twice (i.e. the 'temperature' ) is because increased accuracy will not drive engagement and, therefore, increased accuracy cannot be allowed to get in the way of engagement.
But it was amazing for those of us used to black and white/green/amber screens in DOS. You could put an image as your background. And it stayed there, lurking behind your word processor or spreadsheet, to spring back into your vision whenever you finished up your work.
When Windows 2000 rolled around and I saw how stable it was, I went out and bought it to put on my gaming PC. Another friend from work laughed at me and told me how terrible "Windows NT" was for running games until he saw how smooth Starcraft ran on it.
Yeah, Windows 95/98/ME were terrible.
Certainly I could not watch this in one, unbroken, session without interruption.
... having said that, isn't it funny just how much gun violence there is in the one developed country that allows for open slather gun ownership. It's like, yes, you can never stop a determined person from doing violence, but by reducing the availability and power of fire arms you do stop a lot of fools from doing "mass shooter" levels of damage.
Or, to put it in another way; better and cheaper options for consumers.
> in every country that doesn’t have domestic car industry or huge tariffs against them.
Not every country needs a local car industry. Having a small number of efficient manufacturing countries means that everyone (both the consumers and the manufacturing countries) are better off.
As a non-American, there is nothing special or magical about the US economy besides its size. American cars are generally sub-standard and are increasingly unpopular in my country as they are either too large/loud or saddled with US politics.
As an example, Australia has lifted many of the import barriers to entry to the car market and is flooded (in a good way) with cheap, reliable, and safe electric vehicles. US cars, once heavily dominating under local branding, are vanishingly rare (except in the "light truck wanker" marketplace).
They are selecting for people who will "play the game" or, even better, will believe proactively.
No one with a lick of sense would believe that Amazon strive to be the best employer in the world. But someone who is capable of doing, for e.g., a highly skilled coding job and who believes that Amazon actually strives to be the best employer, is a rare beast who will likely not unionize at the drop of a hat.
I respectfully disagree given the basic fragility of the Suez Canal system along with the fact that Egypt is not growing into a major world power on the back of their governance of this canal.
If this was the first "mistake" made by the new administration and DOGE, then these items would be understandable. Or the second mistake. Or the third, maybe.
This is intentional. That is the only conclusion one can draw now. From the terseness of the letters of dismissal to the unreliability of the message ('you're fired! Wait, no you're not!'), one can only assume this is part of the destruction of democratic institutions that the current administration is pursuing.
And if all hospitals were doing was having doctors treat patients, this would be ok. But healthcare is fueled by these "minor" details and this will result in delays in payment and reimbursent, trouble with patient identification, corruption of clinical coding, etc.
By AI trainers, if not by the authors whose works were encoded.
Changing the names back because you were upset that somone changed them in the first place, with the express knowledge that some people may be affected by this, is a dick move.
One of these moves is a virtue signal, yes, but it has no real impact once completed. This current move from 'main' to 'master' is designed to both virtue signal and to upset/piss people off/etc.
An 'approval to send' option might also help here.