As a matter of fact, yes. Specifically, to the Greenland region.

Although a golden bridge of grossly outsized proportions and festooned with tacky ornamentation would be much preferred.

Apparently, its current purpose is a demo for their "Copilot" AI technology.

Your metaphor would make a lot more sense if kids were designing Lego sets that Lego then sold and vastly under compensated the creators of those sets (while doing a piss poor job of keeping those kids from being contacted directly by adults)

"can't tell the difference between a game and reality"

Uh, while I would argue that you should probably care because that person should be focusing on an investor meeting, it tickles me that you're suggesting somebody playing a videogame during a meeting supports the assertion that "they can't tell the difference between a game and reality".

That would probably amount to a whole lot of people who can't tell the difference between a game and reality (which I don't agree with) rather than a whole lot of people are not focusing on what they should be focusing on (which I do agree with.)

With all of GitHub's great new AI features, it writes all your code for you! It doesn't matter whether the site is up at any given moment; just download your newly completed app at some point then the site is online. You're free to kick back, relax and scroll your social feeds because you don't actually have to do anything anymore. This is truly a golden era!

"Having worked in public school education"

Lol. Means shit all for caring about better education.

"as it helps teachers and their healthcare/pension benefits"

Yes, you dipshit, it must be crazy of me to think that paying teachers well leads to better teachers.

Why would teachers want longer school days? School day lengths are fine. Longer school years? Is school a job? The length of the school year is for kids. There's a reason why schools have breaks, its for students. Additional money for after school activities? I mean, at this point I conclude you're a moron (actually I knew you were already moron) - that's a major ask of every teacher strike I've ever seen. (I dunno, maybe you've been surrounded by fellow idiots? Maybe this is what drives your pessimistic view on the profession .. )

Dollars to donuts, your "Having worked in public education" claim is as IT or computer something something, which doesn't make you an expert on public education. More of a useful idiot, every time I read your words.

I've driven one of those box U-hauls before. It takes some getting used to. You have to be attentive. BE ATTENTIVE to what's behind you. And one time, I actually had to turn around because of a low railroad trestle. It was a bit embarrassing to have not planned my route properly and get forced to turn around in a small parking lot; but nowhere near as embarrassing as peeling the top off the truck.

This is why NASA always packs a tin of Bondo with the mission supplies.

Or just schools, period.

"Data Centers don't seem to bring jobs."

Seems is not a great word in an argument one wishes to make.

imagine thinking that

Fortunately, and overwhelmingly provably, the physical and legal world doesn't work in the way you wish it did.

Protip: as soon as you're talking about "never" or "always" or "happened before" or "still happens" .. basically anything in terms of any absolutes, you're not operating in the real world.

People survived car crashes before seatbelts were mandated. People still die in car crashes even when using seatbelts. You'd be a moron to argue seatbelts are useless or car manufactures should not be legally required to put them in cars.

The things that influence law and society is the actual data (how it changes over time) and nuance, and that's what the law deals in. Things you seem quite resistant to engage in.

Multiple people can share responsibility, as their actions combine together. A person who drives somebody to a bank for the known purpose of robbing the bank is determined to share *some* responsibility for the robbery of the bank. Just because they're not the person who took the money out of the bank vault does not mean the law does not consider them partly responsible.

I know I know, life is so much easier if you just try and make everything stupidly simple.

So you prompt the LLM to "find all the bugs".

Even if the LLM can find every last bug (which in turn assumes that this type of problem isn't NP-hard or has some issue that Godel would point out), just defining to the LLM exactly what a "bug" is seems to be pretty much the same thing as those formal specifications that you just convincingly dismissed as inadequate.

I don't think that there's anything magical about LLMs that would let them get around fundamental mathematical roadblocks.

It would mean that there's an 83% chance that the rest of us would be spared from more posts expounding on your silly line of reasoning.