When I was young people derisively said that fusion was always 25 years away. In the last 10 years people have been saying similarly that fusion is always 10 years away. That suggests that progress has happened, but not as fast as proponents predicted/hope.

That something can happen in a lab environment is a demonstration of how it can happen in nature given enough time and lots of options. Given millions of years, there's a lot of time for things to happen. And further research will likely find even more plausible ways this could end up happening. Heck, humans made nuclear reactors, but even that turns up in nature by sheer accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... .

A partial solution for this is to have a law that if one is getting a tax writeoff this way then one has to give up the copyright on the media and release a copy of the media in some easily accessible fashion.

In this case, there's no better disposal method.

The cost to Warner Bros to keep these on Steam should be minimal. What do they gain by delisting this way?

What technology did you have in mind?

We have far better control systems and radios and things, but making rockets that don't blow themselves to kingdom come if you look at them the wrong way is as hard in 2024 as it was in 1977. Or for that matter, 1969.

...laura

Worldcoin is by itself pretty silly as ideas go. It is also pretty silly to tell them to stop doing this when people are giving them the info in a completely consensual way. If people want to give their info for some cryptocurrency, go and let them. (I don't think that Worldcoin is going to be at all successful, but I don't think Spain's choice here is going to impact that either way substantially.)

I'm... not sure. I don't know how I misread it. You are correct.

You are now doing a weird thing where you are focusing on the word "imply" rather than "show" as if that is some major difference in meaning. The use of "imply" here is simply due to the inherent limitations of any benchmarks. But please note that this is now your third claim you are making. Your first claim was that they "not disclosing what kind of a test, what criteria were benchmarked." That was shown to be wrong. Then you claimed in your second comment that "When in reality, they didn't actually tell you anything about the benchmarks. They merely told you what they called them." That was shown to be wrong, since the benchmarks in questions are not their own and are widely accessible. Now, in response, you've pivoted yet again, to make some massive deal out of the word "imply."

So 1) That's not what you said. 2) In fact, even if you had said that, it would still be wrong. The vast majority of of these benchmarks are benchmarks made by independent organizations where you can find the details of how they work without too much effort. For example, GSM-8k is available here. https://paperswithcode.com/dataset/gsm8k.

Also if one clicks through to the article, they list a whole bunch of other explicit benchmarks including some where they performed less well than the other AIs.

The summary explicitly gives examples. From the summary tests included " GSM-8k for mathematical reasoning and MMLU for expert-level knowledge." Not reading the linked article is one thing, but at least read the summary please.

No, it really is corporate interests. And it isn't a market failure as much as it is companies lobbying state governments to do things which wreck the free markets. For example, some US states have laws which make it difficult to build transmission lines into that state if one doesn't have generation in that state. That has made it very difficult to make new transmission lines for wind power from the Midwest to states in the Southeast. See for example this Wall Street Journal piece from a few years ago https://www.wsj.com/articles/building-the-wind-turbines-was-easy-the-hard-part-was-plugging-them-in-11561176010. The bottom line is that a lot of this is not market failure at all, but corporations deliberately using government to restrict competition from entering the markets. There are of course other issues, like how the US gives NIMBYs massive power to block things. But these are largely also things where the problem is not market failure except in so far as the governments, federal, state and local are stepping in already to distort the markets.

Sorry: the other article URL didn't end up in the comment for some reason. Should have looked at the preview more carefully. The other article I was quoting from is here https://www.usatoday.com/in-de... .

The paper is here https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2313661121. The West states in question are the Rocky Mountain states, which doesn't include California. Does that cause you to reevaluate?