If junior spent 6 months, that means this was done with early gen tech. The game changed big time in January and again in April. Would have again last week if Fable was still out. These are not minor skill jumps. They are akin to a human taking years of skill growth. Any true statement about agentic capabilities is only good for a few weeks before it has to be re-evaluated.

The bidet has entered the chat⦠:-)

To be fair, the ground shifted really fast compared to most tech adoption rates. Even those of us who were following the tech developments and knew the options explored by science fiction found (find!) it hard to believe the speed of industry change. My job is not the same as two months ago, definitely not the same as 6 months ago.

I know a second grade class where all but two kids have a smartphone of their own. Given all the evidence of just how bad that is, I am baffled. Many of these are parents who worry about seatbelts and healthy school lunches. But blinders on the phone issue. I do not understand why.

The researchers started off thinking this was a medical problem. If it was a toxin or virus, that would be a concern. I don't think their intention was to say that teen pregnancies were something to champion, only that it was concerning that it was happening and we didn't know why.

Read through the rest of the article -- the researchers directly tackled each of the possible other explanations that you suggested and ruled them out. Your instincts are good for hypothesis testing, but the data in the article says those were tested.

I take it you missed the part of the article that mentioned that the iPhone also directly links to the rise in teen suicides.

That similarity is because the movie was based on extrapolating on the same research that was working on AI at the time. It is always possible (and science fiction's job) to do that extrapolation to show us what could be. But Ian Banks' "The Culture" is also in that same bootstrapped future. And plenty of others.

Buy the physical book for your local library. Libraries in USA regularly redistribute duplicates to other libraries, so no concerns if it is a common book.

By implication, some people are tools. :-)

The bullet point style was rising popularity before the 2022 ChatGPT epoch. It is strongly favored by readers in the under-40 demographic, at least in USA. I suspect it is becoming more common because of that as much as because of AI.

My company has most of that record for our git repo. I am fairly certain we could bring such a suit. I do not know if Anthropic could. Even so, the "AI generated cannot be copyrighted" theory has not been tested in court. That is only a ruling of the copyright office. I think there is a lot of questions around "transformative use" if you are the person who wrote the transformer based on some of the other invention law.

Only if you can distinguish AI-written lines from human-written lines. The human-written lines are still copyrighted and even small snippets would burn a pirate, if I understand the law correctly.

You know, if you stop saying that about the mods, they might ban you less. :-)