The topic was intelligence. Not your false anti-female invective. Take it somewhere else, it's not welcome here.

Yes, that is in fact what I meant. Thanks for clarifying.

You'll rightly be modded Troll soon enough, but for the record: research has shown no significant difference in the average intelligence of male and female human beings.

However, there is some evidence that genders are better on average at certain kinds of tasks: females on average are better at verbal and memory-intensive tasks, whereas makes on average are stronger with spatial and mathematical reasoning. But of course, the two populations overlap significantly: we have plenty of outstanding female scientists and male lawyers, for example.

And ChatGPT is not necessarily correct here. Neither was George Carlin when he said:

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.

ChatGPT and Carlin are confusing mean with median. The latter divides a population 50-50, the former not necessarily so.

That would indeed be an interesting study.

Religions generally accept wisdom from sacred texts. (Yes, I know there are exceptions.) So one would presume that those who are ready to accept information on the authority of sacred texts would accept it from an AI that is perceived as an authority.

On the other hand, those same religious people could recognize that AI is distinct from their religious texts, and apply a different standard to it.

Michelle Obama was not in a position to drive government policy. Nor did she want to be then. Nor does she want to be now. She has stated repeatedly that she has no interest in serving in a policy-steering public office, elected or appointed. First Lady was her contribution.

It's all well and good to identify contaminants in drinking water, and try to filter them out. It's another to address how they got there in the first place. Per TFA, it seems the current administration is focused on the former, but not the latter.

It makes the mission relatable to the general public. Kind of like the Mars rover Curiosity sending its own tweets.

Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and Outlook; egg and Outlook; egg bacon and Outlook; egg bacon sausage and Outlook; Outlook bacon sausage and Outlook; Outlook egg Outlook Outlook bacon and Outlook; Outlook sausage Outlook Outlook bacon Outlook tomato and Outlook; Outlook egg sausage and Outlook, that's not got much Outlook in it.

I guess that the "proprietary code" isn't so proprietary at all.

My experience with Microsoft Office is that often it is not even compatible with itself. Documents not looking the same after reloading, font sizes changing on their own, printed copies not looking like what's on the screen, and so on.

Which one?

Since you apparently think everyone knows the answer already, you have illustrated the problem that OnlyOffice, Euro-Office, OpenOffice, LibreOffice, and other freeware office suites are trying to address.

IMHO (and not just mine, see below) quantum mechanics hit that wall a century ago.

I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics. -- Richard Feynman

I'm not sure how much "the man" (Hegseth?) can do with what was leaked. It appears to be the code for the command-line tool, not the LLM or its trained weights.

Here you go.