Celebrating someone's death is low-class.

Making a death threat is a crime. There is a difference.

I am strongly opposed to age verification.

However, given that the developer faced (according to the article) "harassment, doxxing, death threats, and a flood of hate mail", maybe we need some form of maturity verification? There's no call for that sort of crap. And I really hope that criminal charges are filed against anyone sending death threats.

There most certainly is. Density-- mass per unit volume-- is the (0,0) term of the stress-energy tensor.

The conops says that the reactor doesn't get turned on until after it's successfully placed in a high orbit.

A good feature of nuclear reactors is that they aren't dangerously radioactive until after you turn them on.

Much better expressed as 5 Kelvin -- who understands Fahrenheit when you are describing temperature close to absolute zero ?

-4 years.

Here's a case of a very experienced journalist getting caught by including made-up quotes that had been hallucinated by the AI he'd used to summarize research information: https://www.theguardian.com/te...

Vandermeersch added: “It is particularly painful that I made precisely the mistake I have repeatedly warned colleagues about: these language models are so good that they produce irresistible quotes you are tempted to use as an author. Of course, I should have verified them. The necessary ‘human oversight’, which I consistently advocate, fell short.”

When even experienced journalists fail to find AI hallucinations, you really can't expect unpaid volunteers to do better.

I think AI is not becoming more "human" every day. The A in AI should really stand for "Alien".

If we ever do achieve AGI (which I doubt... but let's play devil's advocate) the experience of the AGI will be very different from that of humans, and the form its intelligence will take will also likely be very different and alien to us. An intelligence that has never inhabited a biological body nor interacted with other humans is likely to have very different ways of thinking and very different goals from us. Are we able to control that?

OpenAI is definitely headed for bankruptcy. Porn has always been the thing that turbo-charged technological advances. Do you really think VCRs and high-speed Internet were invented for any other reason? :)

Yes. To be precise, banning is a form of regulation which the amendment forbids. Regulation OTHER than banning is not forbidden.

What particularly amused me about this experiment is that they transported protons first. I have this picture of them completing this "dry-run" and deciding to try the anti-protons, which involves them swapping some wires over, or taking some component out and flipping it over before they reinsert it.

You'll probably save $50 per year or more in electricity costs by switching to a Pi.

Moltbook is going to institute a "Prove you're a Robot" requirement.

Yes and no...

Unfortunately, even the best LLMs sometimes make up information ("hallucinate"), and the stuff they make up is deliberately crafted to appear exactly like real information. This is simply unacceptable for an encyclopedia.

If Wikipedia were written by paid professionals, you could plausibly put in place protocols to check and verify, and fire the ones who fail to check properly, but even paid professionals have been seen to let hallucinations through. As it is, as an encyclopedia that it is put together by volunteers, forbidding AI is pretty much a forced choice.

https://www.evidentlyai.com/bl...
  https://arize.com/llm-hallucin...
  https://thisweekinsciencenews....