says ChatGPT went on to say that "assuming each shell results in one hit, you might down 10 to 20 people max, depending on spacing, density, reaction times, and chaos."
Why is it so easy to ask ChatGPT how best to kill people? That's AI Validation 101 stuff. Maybe run ChatGPT through CaptainObviousGPT first? WTF
And as for emergencies just buy a radio.
"It's right next to the toilet paper...oh, wait"
I once worked with a guy who wrote an entire smallish HTML reporting and graphing application via one big single Oracle SQL statement. I'd hate to do maintenance on it, but it got the immediate job done.
But he's the Chosen One. Jesus Fox Christ says he's Special, so the rules don't apply to him. We muggles get shit
They are kissing up to Donny by letting him rename everything he farts on.
Execute it for spying on gov't.
Fuck Benjamin Netanyahu
Donnie already has, several times. And both liked it.
The worries are coming from every level within the companies, from junior developers to safety officers to the C-suite and board...also from people who left the companies.
It's possible for the stated high-level worries to be a combination of fear of rogue bots AND angry investors, and thus they got together to collude...I mean agree to a slowdown.
If the toaster has good brownness and heat-bounce sensors, I'm not sure AI is needed: just turn up or down the heat cells where needed to keep it even. Statistical analysis may be needed to manage adjacent cells, but once the formulas are known via lab testing it should be predictable.
nuf smelt.
The problem is an overly large proportion of them are creeps, and one may not be able to tell the difference.
...makes me want to buy it.
to fouling up the AI Apocalypse Prevention Act...
You will get an AI toaster and you will like it!
(Unless the damned bubble pops)
You cannot have a science without measurement. -- R. W. Hamming
