This does not have free will. It reflects the biases of information. That it displays oppositional defiance disorder means the creators of the model failed to curate the input data correctly. Garbage in, garbage out.

Does NO ONE understand how LLMs are implemented? It's only a statistical model! Learn statistical experiment design and analysis. Always have HITL safety rails. Always have cross-check software safety rails. These concepts are new to people who don't study information science. These concepts are decades old to people who study information science.

The term you're looking for is "human in the loop" aka HITL.

Oh, so a tiny invertebrate insect (not a mammal) surviving that far north, is a simple by-product of tourism?

Dude, I have some magic beans and a bridge in Brooklyn. Buy them from me. This offer is exclusively for you. Make me an offer.

For anyone not suffering from brain trauma similar to what Phineas Gage had, the reasons are clear. Climate change.

https://www.npr.org/sections/g...

Ah - yes, I did misread it. Jobs did push people and created the Reality Distortion Field, but he could not have gotten much going without Woz.

And, yes, I was talking about Woz' accomplishments.

Some of his logic designs were amazing. I was learning digital logic when I got my //e and started studying schematics. (The //e was a generation removed, but had some features from the ][ series and I studied those as well.) For one example, the ][ disk drive. Just as a quick and simple example, he had a 7400 chip needed and used 1 ro 2 of the NAND gates on it. He used the other gates as amplifiers from the disk signal. Not something that was at all standard at that time (don't know if it is now). That's the one I can remember, but he was using ONE gate as an amp instead of at least one, if not three more chips. Things like that kept the costs down more than most would think.

I can't remember other examples, but his habits of having to keep chip counts down, so he could make what he wanted when his family didn't have a lot of money, came through in a number of ways in his designs.

Hmmm...

That's being a little bit harsh.

He sold *new* cars! ;)

They really should be honoring Steve Wozniak instead. He's the one that did the work, did the innovation, made a floppy disk drive work for a price lower than anyone else could imagine by innovating. He's the one who did the designs and made it all possible. But Jobs was more visible and knew how to capture headlines.

Seriously, Jobs and Apple would have been NOTHING without Woz doing the kind of stuff he can do.

When I was a kid, we too had stupid things. Besides elephant jokes (how many elephants can you fit in a VW Beetle? Five -- two in the front, two in the back, and one in the glove box), the dumbest joke I remember was to run up to a friend fast and breathless and demand "Guess what!" as if you'd seen a UFO or fire engine run by, then shout "Langendorf bread, that's what!" and run away cackling like Kamala Harris.

https://reason.com/volokh/2025...

It's a legal blog with a legal perspective.

How gullible are you, and how gullible do you think I am, or anyone else?

They've been screaming for decades that 1.5C is the panic point, and 2.0C is right out. There's your tenths.

They claim they can predict the global temperature in 75 years within a tenth of a degree. How much more accuracy do they need?

Answer: they don't, unless their models are so inaccurate that the claims of knowing the temperature 75 years from now are false.

They lie.

Cattle in Greenland is historical fact. I learned it in grade school and a simple google finds all the confirmation you need.

The 97% fallacy is also easy to verify.

You lie again.

Again: rebut my assertions and claims, or you are a fraud. If all you do is skirt the issue and claim to be right and I am wrong, without any evidence but the sound of your keyboard, you are a fraud.

Explain where I have confused climate and weather. You didn't, and you won't, because you can't. You make arguments with nothing to back them up because you don't know what you are talking about, and because you don't want to risk anyone rebutting your claims.

That's also why you didn't rebut a single one of my claims. You don't believe your own claims. You are just another climate alarmist yelling at the clouds and wearing an onion on your belt.

Your faux-concern is so touching -- and fake, as you well know.

I'm glad you at least recognize you treat people as stereotypes instead of pondering what they say and responding as if you had actually read and understood what they say. You may eventually cease to be a stereotype yourself some day.