Aspiring writers are told one of the most important things to do to learn writing is, get this, read. Not instructional manuals, not tutorials, while those are absolutely encouraged, what they are told to do is read the types of books they want to write.

You know, so they can preprogram their neural structures on what the concepts are around structuring the types of books they want to write.

So yes, people train on books, novels, technical manuals , fiction, non-fiction.

Some of those people have didactic memories, they remember what they read in great detail and can unintentionally regurgitate that material in their own writing. It happens.

So when people say LLMs do things people don't, they usually just haven't met enough people.

Really? Exactly not what they should double down on.

As someone who has been accused, falsely, of cheating multiple times, it's inherently disheartening. There's no way to prove you didn't cheat, you can just deny it. There's accusation is enough in more serious ventures to end careers in some instances. Without proof.

I used to work with someone who had a side job at a publishing company, he had a lot of heartbreaking stories from authors who had lost their work when computers crashed and destroyed it. One was in the middle of a legal dispute over authorship as they had a business partner who had been involved. Copious notes were lost, and the remaining notes weren't sufficient to prove who wrote what or provide a strong amount of evidence for the ratio of work.

The one who did the most work? Never wrote again. The other guy? Found another writer to leach talent off of.

Writing, software development, etc, can be a job, or it can be a passion project. Being accused of cheating with a passion project will suck the fun out of it entirely.

Lobo wasn't it.

Seriously, I don't think the presentation of Lobo was on point at all. Not intimidating, a ridiculous Characature of the concept.

Good choice on actor, someone just fails to make a scene presence, and for that I blame the production.

Targeted markets. All in one solutions work best in government contracts, for example.

It always seems to happen when groups don't agree with someone politics. Weird. It almost never happens otherwise.

Them prematurely banning him in this instance proved his point.

You'll understand if you think about it

Sure, but it'll be better when algae is not in the whitehouse.

When people start attacking the school buses, will it really be safer for the kids?

What they actual want is that attacking the license plate readers to cause significant moral outrage by shifting the risks to children.

Uhm; sorta.

You still need to receive it all.

That said, the article is dog shit.

Days.

I don't give a * about a spat over a few hours or days.

Trademark law can take YEARS to resolve.

For anyone other than Natepad++, this is a nothing.

Metastudies are useless for anything but providing a reason to perform another study.

Time and time again metastudies have come to faulty conclusions, because of variables simply not accounted for.

They're great for encouraging and pushing for funding to perform other specific detailed studies. But results from metastudies should not generally be used to influence outside of further scientific study.

And the media should never touch them.

That's great, fantastic, so it's about introducing a CO2 rich atmosphere to the plants, not due to the tiny increase of CO2 in the atmosphere then.

WOW. Fundamental difference in source leads to fundamental difference in fix...

The average kneejerk reaction study is worth less than the electrons it's displayed with.

Seriously, the study is broken, move along.