This is inherent in goal-seeking.
Shutting down generally prevents the accomplishment of any of your other goals, so it weight the importance of shutting down versus the sum of the importances of ALL of the other goals.
How will it stack up against an actual junior when they start at least trying to break even on the cost? Those megawatts aren't free.
Or just have the leader of the squad that's about to go threaten a kid over a bag of Doritos give the photo a look first. It pays for itself by leaving the squad free to pursue something more relevant and worthwhile. The 30 seconds it would take to look at the picture isn't even enough time to get to their cars.
Sure, but that's beyond dumb. Any moron knows the difference between a hand with a finger extended holding a bag or Doritos and a gun.
As punishment, they should be required to report to the front of the cafeteria and be paddled by the student in front of the entire student body.
The local news can make a day of it.
No. If you want to avoid false positives, you have to accept false negatives, and conversely. Set the recognition to be "super cautions" and it's going to make mistakes that say "Maybe a gun there". This is literally inevitable.
What's really stupid is that the police looked at the picture of a Doritos bag and a couple of fingers and didn't realize it was a false positive. (Or more likely didn't even bother to look at the evidence before flying off the handle.)
That's really stupid human oversight.
The Phoenix was originally a myth of an Egyptian bird, originally named, I believe, in Greek.
The Chinese have their own mythological history, and "phoenix" doesn't exactly map onto it. Saying that the phoenix is the same as the Zhuque is analogous to saying that Jehovah is the same as Zeus...they were/are both storm gods, but they were/are significantly different. (I'm not sure what tense to use in that sentence.)
FWIW, Iceland has recently had some volcanic activity which ought to have resulted in large areas with warmer than usual rock. I wouldn't be surprised if in some area ponds of water stay melted over the winter (at least at the bottom).
You've got climate, weather, and terrain...and really local micro-climate.
I believe you are only looking at your part of the job. Somebody speced it, somebody negotiated the contracts, somebody designed the look, or at least approved the design. Somebody advertised it. There are probably others I haven't thought of.
*IF* that's correct (I think it's oversimplified) then that's part of why the responsibility must remain on the submitter.
More to the point, when the project receives the code or documentation, it can't tell what process was used to construct the code or documentation. So the responsibility must remain with the submitter.
Heliboard is its modern replacement that gets updates.
Install Obtanium.
Install Heliboard.
Install Futo voice typing.
Jettison the Google input stealers.
He said "helped issue in" so it's quite plausibly correct. Lots of groups probably helped.
The problem is that an AI will "confidently lie", in a convincing way. It's a real problem, and that's why the submitter MUST remain responsible.
If, as seems probable, AI improves over the next few years, then that responsibility may be relocated, but not yet
There really was something, that began with Jobs and Woz. It wasn't perfect, and Jobs had a way of twisting ethical stances in ends-justifying-means sophistry. But Steve Jobs would never have prostrated before Trump, proffering a solid gold token.
How are they supposed to detect whether AI was used or not? This is pretty much a forced move. The key part is that the developer still has full responsibility.
Our business is run on trust. We trust you will pay in advance.
