How can they account for the observer effect on the results. Introduction into the system then leads to a measurable point and negating "true" randomness.

Read the end of the study - it's mostly funded by AI companies: Funding: We gratefully acknowledge support from NIH/NIEHS award R01ES032470 (A.K.M.), the Harvard Medical School Deanâ(TM)s Innovation Award for Artificial Intelligence (A. K. M.), Macy Foundation awards B25-15 and P25-04 (A.R. and J.C.), Moore Foundation award 12409 (A.R., J.C., and Z.K.), NIH/NIAID 1R01AI17812101 (J.C.), NIH-NCATS UM1TR004921 (J.C.), the Stanford Bio-X Interdisciplinary Initiatives Seed Grants Program (J.C.), NIH U01 NS134358 (J.C.), and a Stanford RAISE Health Seed Grant 2024 (J.C.). Author contributions: P.G.B., T.A.B., A.K.M., and A.R. conceived the study and conducted the analyses; A.K.M. and A.R. obtained funding and supervised the work; and all authors contributed to interpretation and writing of the manuscript. Competing interests: A.R. is a Visiting Researcher at Google DeepMind. E.H. is employed by Microsoft. J.C. is cofounder of Reaction Explorer LLC, a paid medical expert witness from Elite Experts, and received one-time honoraria or travel expenses for invited presentations by Insitro, General Reinsurance Corporation, AASCIF, and other industry conferences, academic institutions, and health systems. Z.K. discloses royalties from Oakstone Publishing and Wolters Kluwer. A.O. discloses employment of his spouse by Exact Sciences. R.-E.A. is employed by the Massachusetts Medical Society and has consulted for Lumeris. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.

I would never have expected the "neutral" Swiss to cooperate with a fascist government in punishing a civilian population! They've never done that before or have a well documented history of that behavior. I'm shocked.

So they moved all of the business's data from one set of servers (that they have full control) to another (which they do not). How is this an improvement for anyone? Except the cloud provider's bottom line?

This is truly the hallmark of great efficiency. Why wait for phishing scams and other schemes when you can provide that service yourself?

It's called a joke. I developed it myself - and engineered your butt-hurt.

First I'm a Developer that develops buggy code. Then, I'm an Engineer that has to correct my crappy code and actually get it to work.

Figma Balls.

Why the fuck doesn't everyone now understand that every keystroke sent to a big tech company will be retained and shared with the whole world either by selling the info, disclosing the info to their marketers, or hackers (a term that used to mean somethign) just simply taking the info.

I'm never going to buy a new printer again. I've found two (actually 3, but I can't remember one's model) great bargains: an HP LaserJet P3015 with duplex (front and back) black printing and a HP Color LaserJet MFP M477fnw that does good quality color and has a feeder scanner (similar to your old.) The 3015 came with half of a cartridge full for a total of $15 and the other was $20. Regardless, go office grade+ on your printers - individual cartridges are more, but price per page is much better and reliability is superior. Brother is also good because they have less DRM crap than new HPs (I think.)

Parent company licenses out patents through subsidiary. Then acquires another subsidiary and establishes patent holdings. Use these new holdings (at least four years after original agreement) to sue the rights holder (Intel). It seems pretty clear that they were trying to pull a fast one on Intel with a shell game of patent holders.

Single Press Album - Very limited and collectable. Objectively it was art by established artists. At what point does art and securities collide? Fine art has been used for money laundering forever and is somewhat accepted (if you have the right lawyers and country). So, does art have to be subjectively judged "worth it" by critics or auditors in order to be assigned a value? Beauty is in the eye (or ear) of the beholder. I don't see they can call them securities.

For myself, I can visualize things to a degree that is indistinguishable from a memory. For example, there is a sculpture of a dinosaur at our local zoo. It is a brachiosaurus. I can remember it and its surroundings, but I can also replace it with any other object and it will be just as valid in my "mind's eye". I can put a bronze chicken and it is just as clear as my memory. I am afraid this would make me susceptible to gaslighting of less ingrained memories, because I can conjure up just as vivid fictions if prompted.

On a side note, why is the autocorrect for brachiosaurus, brontosaurus?

Care to provide those stats?

Damn I'm sick of the AI buzzwords already. There will never be any "AI" until one is created that will intentionally choose the wrong answer because it has a "hunch".