Of course it's accurate. It serves as a template so I don't miss things .. for example to include examples. To mention things I might normally forget to say. It writes out the sentences .. if I disagree I won't put it. Declining to write a letter because of my own schedule, or writing a shitty one because of my own forgetfulness or shortcomings is not an excuse to screw someone else out of something they've worked for and deserve.

And whoops this comment was on the wrong article mod down off-topic if you have mods to blow..

Sorry I was incorrect about losing land mass, it looks like we'd actually gain overall land mass (antarctica).

If the Earth warms up say 10 degrees .. we won't go extinct from it. Sure, we'd lose a lot of land mass to the ocean and the Earth will look weird, reference: https://images.fineartamerica.... But our species, as toolmakers and builders, can survive in any temperature .. we have AC. We have solar power, we have nuclear power. We're not going extinct from climate change. At least not directly. However, humans may go extinct from them killing each other --and that can happen at any temperature. It only didnt happen in the 1940s because neither side had nukes. As a species we can't get along, for whatever reason. We have tribalist tendencies. For ease of solving situations, we willifully zero-out our ability to see individual based characteristics and only classify people according stereotypes (true of false) of tribal membership. That was fine when it was possible to fight or run away from each other without mass-casualties and all you had to do choose a place to hide, wait things out, or stay out of rock-throwing range. Now, with the weapon we have .. we can't hide or run in a large-scale war between great powers.

With or without government legislature/mandate?

How many pedestrian, passenger, and innocent driver deaths is that worth? I thought the laws have to try to protect as many innocent people as possible. Btw, if a situation is a reasonably unforeseen accident (such as a meteorite striking the car) then it's deemed an accident and nobody can be sued. For example, before it was known seat belts could prevent accidents you couldn't sue a company for injuries caused by a car not being equipped with seatbelts. A company can only be expected to take reasonable precautions as understood by the technology and expertise of the time. If there's a situation a self driving car doesn't know how to handle .. because it's pretty unusual .. then you can't hold the company liable -- nor should you be able to. If you could, then self-driving tech will never develop and we'll have to tolerate 40,000 people dying annually just in the USA (and countless other severely injured/maimed). We should do whatever it takes to reduce that number even if all we can get it down to is 39,999.

It saves me a ton of time -- and I am trying to incorporate AI in every task -- not just coding. Glancing through and fixing is required, but It works "good enough" to save time overall once I figured out how to dialogue with it. Most of the time, at least for me, the code compiles. I seriously think all employers and colleges need to mandate students incorporate AI into their workflow. AI will only keep improving, and the people who know how to use it will be the most productive. I pretty much use AI for everything, from writing reference letters, to research, and coding. Used to be when someone asks a dumb question or makes a speculation I would say "did you google it?" .. now it's did you ask the AI for help or detailed instructions on that? Mind you, I've caught AI blatantly lying/hallucinating more than a few times .. but those lies are always easy to spot for me because it's usually suspicious. For example, earlier today it recommended a microcontroller without adequate data pins for what I needed it to do (even though I specified what I needed it for).. but when I asked "are you sure it has enough data pins?", it figured out it was lying and corrected itself -- which is a good sign --it had the data to know it was wrong but hadn't adequately fact checked itself. Yeah, so it makes subtle mistakes .. but instead of saying "fuck AI" and not using it .. I keep using it because it's only like the first couple of years of AI .. it will keep improving especially with feedback and better reasoning and self fact-checking. It will only get better and now is the time to incorporate the habit of using it instead of being the grandpa who can't program a VCR or (for you young 'uns) use a smartphone when the age for that comes.

Is it? I have no idea, but I do know it saves me a ton of time. Glance through and fix is what I usually do. It works "good enough" to save time overall. Most of the time, at least for me, the code compiles. I seriously think all employers and colleges need to mandate students incorporate AI into their workflow. AI will only keep improving, and the people who know how to use it will be the most productive. I pretty much use AI for everything, from writing reference letters, to research, and coding. Used to be when someone asks a dumb question or makes a speculation I would say "did you google it?" .. now it's did you ask the AI for help or detailed instructions on that? Mind you, I've caught AI blatantly lying/hallucinating more than a few times .. but those lies are always easy to spot for me because it's usually suspicious. For example, earlier today it recommended a microcontroller without adequate data pins for what I needed it to do (even though I specified what I needed it for).. but when I asked "are you sure it has enough data pins?", it figured out it was lying and corrected itself -- which is a good sign --it had the data to know it was wrong but hadn't adequately fact checked itself. Yeah, so it makes subtle mistakes .. but instead of saying "fuck AI" and not using it .. I keep using it because it's only like the first couple of years of AI .. it will keep improving especially with feedback and better reasoning and self fact-checking. It will only get better and now is the time to incorporate the habit of using it instead of being the grandpa who can't program a VCR or (for you young 'uns) use a smartphone when the age for that comes.

Tiktok prompted people to do that? You have evidence of that? Btw, have you ever tried to take a kid's phone away? How do they act?

Your brain doesn't auto filter out grammatical errors?

There's more CCP and communist/anti-USA propaganda on all other platforms than on TikTok. TikTok is mostly15 second videos of people dancing.

Hence why they're discontinuing it. My guess is it was being used in appliances or devices that were designed in the 1980s that were "good enough" and didn't need a redesign.

But now there's better alternatives for both cost and lower power consumption. STM32 for example, the cheapest of which goes for less than 25 cents?

Purely an act of hysteria. We should act on evidence, not prejudice.

"after years of watching autonomous cars hamper emergency response efforts in California and outright kill a pedestrian in Arizona."

So one death, basically .. that happened years ago.. because Uber blatantly ignored obvious safety issues. I guess humans killing people is no big deal? Is there any point to killing this technology so early? It's probably already a lot safer than a human driver and will only get safer. It's dumb to ban things based on an event that happened 5 or 6 years ago. Airplanes had dismal safety at one time, but now they're super safe. Same thing with cars too, actually. Now why would they ban autonomous driving without even giving it a chance to be developed?