It already happened. Back in 2017, I was asked -- and declined -- to help build such a system with a basic "move toward face, shoot if face" directive. It was intended to murder anyone indiscriminately that approached within its designated range (approved people would have a way to pause the system to come through). I followed that company's progress for a few years, and it was scary the vids they would put out... and then they went dark when bought up by undisclosed someone. Those sorts of things have only become more advanced over the last two years as they've acquired LLM interaction abilities. They just aren't talked about as much. In my opinion, the flying drone strikes are the ones we should probably worry more about than the ground-based robots -- much harder to defend against. The tech we see deployed by Ukraine and Russia is appearing everywhere.

They haven't fired their engineers yet, so there's a lot of people still holding the line. I'd say it's like Boeing while the 737Max was still in development -- there's still time to fire the CEO and right the ship.

It is the perfect time for an attack on the company.

I am curious what the AGENT.md file looked like for that full module. What directive did you give? We have several modules that it spun whole cloth at this point.

All of it. Have not written a line in high-security, safety conscious, real-time precision application since February. Started off with small functions one by one. Now it is designing multiple parallel ops. I and my team review everything. Yes, we find bugs, and LLM fixes them. Total cycle time cut from days to minutes. Never going back. Expect the end of professional human software development before I retire. I am learning to transition to systems engineering.

Sadly, we need to cry for everyone caught in this system. It is in our own best interests to make sure it is stopped, even for those too short sighted to see how it works against them.

For the people at the bottom, any amount of tax hurts more than the people at the top, whether it is on income or on transaction. Each dollar of tax is a far higher percent of total income, so the impact is greater even when the dollar amounts are smaller. There are lots of folks in our economy for whom an extra $50 per month is huge improvement in life quality. If you can zero out the tax on fundamentals -- food, clothing, gas, utilities, road tolls -- then sales taxes are a lot more fair, placing the burden onto the parts of the economy that can afford it (and onto those who most benefit from a stable societal environment).

But a dollar is worth more to a poor person than to a rich person. Flat taxes have greater impact on the poor than on the rich.
What we really need is a *continuous gradient* tax system that ratchets up to 100% as you cross about $50 million -- you're free to give the excess away before tax day, but one way or another, you don't get to keep enough money to swing the economy by yourself.

Not quite -- you either learned there were two hemispheres of the brain, or you learned there was an older section of the brain and a more modern section. Both are true and I'm not sure which one you're mistaking for this research. What this discovery says is that the old and new systems are not the same brain, not the same cell types, not the same anything except in tight proximity to each other. It's a pretty big discovery and not something covered in the past.

The statement was âoeintention". Making mistakes on the world stage is expected. But unlike Reagan, Nixon, Clinton, Obama, Bush, Bush, or Ford, we now have a president who has no intention of helping anyone who does not worship Trump. The others tried, with varying degrees of success and varying levels of intellect, to benefit the whole USA.

Do you pay for Google search?! If not, it is not SaaS. As the saying goes, you are the product.

Just focusing on new music has previously been shown to cause distraction, according to references in the article. It is unknown if that effect is strong enough to account for theses stats.

The summary said they did not have a mechanism for causation. The summary said "linked". Several causes were theorized but would need study.

The data analysis appears to be correct. What makes it propaganda?

These are many of the same Anthropic researchers who have been working on safe deploy for years. They have not given up hope. And they continue to publish their findings. These are not new voices of questionable provenance.