There are still places I write out checks because I get a discount for doing it.

Given this level of subterfuge, all I can say is, "Sloppy job, Mossad."

Almost as bad as the people who try to get their iPhone payment app running.

There is a serious question of why people get so upset about glasses that record as opposed to cell phones, etc. I have a theory on it and that is that, despite all the emphasis on eye contact, humans actually find it really aggressive and threatening. Traditional camcorders, cameras, and taking cell phone video all either outright block the eyes or at least the eyeline. You are not staring at them, you are staring at your phone. I think that is, at least in part why devices like smart glasses make people more aggressive than other recording.

The clear counterargument to that though, in the case of face mounted recording devices, is that they don't force a choice between helping/calling police or filming. True, that should not be a real dilemma, the obvious choice should be to help. The thing is, that problem in crowds of no-one stepping forward to help does not exist purely because of people recording. There are lots of reasons people don't put themselves forward in situations like that. One of them is the assumption that someone else will be able to handle it better than them, or simply waiting for someone to step forward and lead, etc. There are also concerns about liability, possibly about self-endangerment and a dozen or more anxieties and neuroses that can cause the problem. Recording with a cell phone probably exacerbates the issue though, by giving people an activity that, in the moment, their mind can rationalize as doing something. If recording is a less active and more passive process, leaving people free to actually do something and taking away their excuse for rationalization, it might encourage more people to actually help.

Mileage may vary, of course. On balance though, it seems like head mounted recording devices are more of a solution to the problem you were talking about than an exemplar of it.

First,mandatory screen time needs to be limited. If they want text books in ebook form, great, but they'll need a way to restrict school issued pads to school work during the school day.

On the flip side, I have more than once heard a parent complaining that homework is being given that requires a computer to complete where a school doesn't allow chromebooks to be taken home. That's equally absurd. Not every family can afford to give each kid a computer, and sometimes computers break. It's not like parents can just grab an extra one at the corner store like they would a pack of pencils or paper. If school work requires a computer and/or internet connection, the school should provide it. If that includes homework, the students must be allowed to take it home.

If the schools don't like that or can't afford it, they can issue text books and homework that can be completed with pencil and paper (yes, that includes accepting hand written essays).

And as for not letting parents view the assignments, that's ridiculous. Of course the parents have a right to see it. If some company wants to claim that to be proprietary information, I guess the school can't use it at all.

It's crazy to complain about students on their screens too much and then have mandatory screen time. It's equally ridiculous to complain that parents need to be more involved and then shut parents out.

/rant

This is "absolutely without question" incorrect. One of the most useful properties of LLMs is demonstrated in-context learning capabilities where a good instruction tuned model is able to learn from conversations and information provided to it without modifying model weights.

Who cares? This is a rather specific and strange distinction without a difference that does not seem to be in any way related to anything stated in this thread. Randomness in token selection impacts the KV matrix which impacts evaluation of subsequent tokens.

This is pure BS, key value matrices are maintained throughout.

Again with determinism nonsense.

LOL see the program isn't malfunctioning it is just doing what it was programmed to do. These word games are pointless.

The dot.com bubble provided value in the form of useful infrastructure investments. When the AI bubble bursts all you are going to be left with are rooms full of densely packed GPUs that will be scrapped and sold off for pennies on the dollar.

How much of a time saver is it to have a magical oracle at your fingertips that constantly lies to you? How much time is saved when you have to externally cross check everything it says? It only saves "tremendous" time when you can afford not to care about the results.

All of these post training bludgeons are inherently dishonest. They attempt to sell an intentional lie inserted by model designers and ultimately make the technology worse and more difficult to use.

Good point. So here's a solution to make everyone happy: A precondition for the acquisition of Warner Brothers (by anybody) should be to place WBs current library in the public domain. Then the unions and everyone else will have plenty of work to do creating new content.

After all, isn't this what copyright is supposed to encourage? The creation of new works?

These will make excellent teaching devices for the kids learn, in short order, how to bypass said controls.

Kids will do what they can get away with.

I think that's a bit of a joke. Isn't Kapoor the guy who thinks he has the exclusive right to develop artwork in stainless steel as well?

Sure, the patent holder of VANTA Black may have accepted money from Kapoor for the right. But that makes Kapoor the idiot. How can one restrict the use of something if it is sold it in rattle-cans?

They used to haul in a few cyclists now and then for riding across the old Evergreen Point bridge (Washington SR 520). Because there was no provision for cyclists or pedestrians. The nwe bridge fixed that.

There seems to be little doubt that the majority of voter suppression in the US comes from the Republican party (see various court cases that have ended up with, for example consent decrees that are later ignored). So, logically, unless they are really, really bad at planning it, it seems pretty clear which way they sway election. Also, consider your claimed position, that claiming a stolen election will sway independent voters away from the party whose members make the claim. Considering all of the activity from the Republicans (and specifically the ones in actual positions of power, like Trump) over claims that the 2020 Presidential election was somehow stolen, compared to the relatively minor activity over claims that the 2024 election was stolen, how do you justify that as a reason for votes to shift towards Republicans to Democrats?

That would require some sort of enforcement in the face of a possible riot by Critical Mass. The law may say "no", but the realities of enforcement say, "Go ahead, kid."