At one point in history, people believed that all you needed to run a business was an MBA. Actual knowledge of the product, processes, people, etc. was irrelevant.

A narrow focus on "managing" a team of AI chat bots suffers from a similar narrow-mindedness. Without actual knowledge of the areas that you're relying on the chat bots to manage, you have no way of determining if the work product you are getting is of any use.

Using a team of bots to produce code without domain knowledge or even general purpose computer science knowledge can only eventually end in tears. But I guess if you can generate the kind of mess a bureaucratic consultancy staffed with MBAs, at a fraction of the price... that's progress of sorts?

Actually, it doesn't even take 5 minute of manual work on Google.

Just checking to see if a given citation exists, nevermind the actual content, is a simple matching query. If I were a lawyer, the very first thing I would do would be to dump every public listing of caselaw I could get my hands on as a local searchable case index, in parallel with having access to a tool like lexis-nexis or PACER (with recap) for more in-depth research. It honestly should be one of the intermediate steps in an AI bot workflow - validate that the citations exist... and then verify that the citation actually bolsters the argument.

Suggested tools:

https://free.law/recap
https://case.law/
https://www.courtlistener.com/...

If you're going to turn an AI bot loose to generate arguments for you, the very least you can do is check its homework, same as you would do for any supervised clerk, paralegal, or lawyer in training working for you. That it can generate bullshit faster than you can is no excuse for shutting off your brain and signing off on it without even doing the bare minimum of due diligence.

The next level of work would be having an AI bot analyze each case and the citations used for the arguments in each, to generate a tree of citations that can be used to argue in one direction or another. Then depending on what arguments you want to bolster, you can selectively cite the cases that give more weight to your case, and prepare counterarguments in case the opposition has prepared an equivalent set of trees that will cherry pick case citations against your argument.

But forget robot lawyers generating bullshit cases. What I want to see is the robot trial judge (and the robot red team lawyer playing the part of the opposition) that can audit your case beforehand and pick it apart so you can be better prepared before you go to trial.

Engagement.

Every web algorithm now is curated to maximize user engagement. When users stay engaged, the advertisements get delivered, and the website earns revenue. When you disengage from the service, they stop making money. So stay engaged, and enjoy your soma.

Not only will the government have future legal complications because of it, many of the corporations that have abandoned their DEI policies fail to consider that they originally instituted them as part of lawsuit settlements, and that cancelling their policies will likely result in the same institutional racism that led to the earlier lawsuits.

Except now they've done it on purpose, knowing that the earlier harms would return, and the lawsuits will be bigger.

Yeah why didn't they give them wings or gigantic brains or forehead lasers or something useful???

Are you sure you're really this stupid? Seems performative.

Don't just wave your hands, what enforcement mechanism are you talking about?

> Bruh. Apt already relies on Perl, which has no formal language specification. What nonsense is this?

You are right, which is why I don't think this is a huge deal.

Though perl5 compatibility back to c.2000 is pretty good.

Today's rust code most likely won't run in 2050 on modern compilers.

But perl4 code doesn't run well today either.

Yet nothing in trixie needs to run anything from buzz - so as long as everything works within a version or two it's hard to imagine anybody being negatively affected.

I have a UPS package shipped Overnight/Saturday Delivery on Friday and it now appears to be on a truck near Chicago. It was originally scheduled to transit from South Dakota to New England.

New delivery date is Tuesday. I hope the sender gets his money back!

(I didn't need it that quickly but the sender was making good on a delivery date guarantee, at a loss of his profits).

I have a floppy controller on order that doesn't know how to read disks; it just passes through magnetic field data to software which is supposed to be able to reconstruct the disk image.

Hopefully these tapes will be OK to read as long as somebody can build a magnetic read head of the correct type.

Maybe with ML there will be a reasonable chance of reconstructing faded regions. Old audio tape is still mostly fine, so fingers crossed.

BTW, what a great job these folks have!

> No need for all that. Either "Judgement is for the other side" or "Case dismissed." Clears the docket, and slows down these kinds of submissions until they're at least doublechecked.

Interesting. I think you've changed my mind about this.

Economic incentives are probably the way to go.

> Hopefully there are more relevant "science objectives" than this dead issue.

It's an exoteric story. Really they want funding to build rockets and this is a technology demonstrator.

But there is a theory that the asteroid belt is the former crust of Mars. More data on that would be interesting.

It's of course "widely discredited" but not with a scientific method or anything. Comparing isotope ratios would be fun someday.

If you REALLY want to you can set this in pavucontrol in about twenty seconds. Should last until the browser restarts.

Might even work with pipewire if the planets are aligned.

The idea to "end hunger" would require massive military action to take over all the places that have hunger and creating dictators who were in line with your goals and would forcefully overcome obstacles to food distribution.

People are really dumb. People often think that just buying enough food for everybody to eat would somehow cause everybody to be able to eat. But insufficient food production is not the main cause. And if there were no other obstacles to hunger, the cheapest food, the oldest food, the lowest quality food would already be flowing to those people, and we wouldn't need to talk about ending hunger, we'd only be talking about improving nutrition. The vast majority of hunger is caused by their local governance, be that their official government or gangs, militants, etc. that are actually participating in local governance.

You commented without first finding your glasses so you could read the comment chain, grandpa.