People seem to only have memory that goes back two years.

We went to war with Iraq due to faulty intel. No AI was involved at all, at least not in the modern sense of the term. Just a human expert hallucinating a bioweapons lab from a blurry photo.

Russia almost nuked us due to a faulty machine sending a false positive about a nuclear attack. Definitely not AI.

It makes sense to teach them about AI, what it is good for and what not to use it for. Just like how we learned how to use a calculator in primary school, after we learned manual multiplication and long division. A lesson for AI could be to ask students to write an essay, and teach them how to use AI to do research, let it help to give structure to their text, how to check sources and accuracy, and so on. It would be used as a tool a few times, to teach them about the tool, after they learn how to go about such things without using AI.

And coding can be a very good teaching tool for that. That should be the goal of teaching coding in schools, that and trying to spark an interest in the subject in children. Not preparing them for a career in software engineering.

As for AI, it's not going away, and kids will be using it. So teach them the stuff about it they are less likely to pick up on their own. Such as the dangers and pitfalls.

If you're vain enough to want to stand out with exclusive emojis or animated whatevers, then spending money on a Nitro subscription makes rational sense.

OpenAI's failures prove that the corporations are the only ones that can be trusted!

Thus solving the problem once and for all.
- Yes, but...
ONCE AND FOR ALL!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

It can destroy us if we entrust it with too much stuff. Let it run all the stores, and the logistics for those stores. And military logistics while we are at it. Maybe balance our power grid. Let it suggest governmental policy. Teach our kids.

It won't destroy us because it "decides" to; LLMs do not make decisions. It optimizes for certain goals, using shitty instructions and shitty training data. Which means that under certain conditions it can make completely unexpected and illogical actions, like those Chinese bipedal robots glitching out. So... it will destroy us because - under certain conditions - it will utterly suck at its job.

No but maybe they should.

It should be opt in. So that you are aware from the start what you are potentially getting in to.

My cat just took a dump in front of the litterbox. Somehow that seems slightly more relevant than this news.

The thing here is that there isn't "Apple". There is Apple-the-parent-company, and Apple UK. From the perspective of law, Apple-the-parent is a supplier to Apple UK. Apple UK will have been ordered not to disclose information, including its suppliers. Therefore nothing restricts Apple-the-parent other than its contract as a supplier to Apple UK.

Yes I'm aware that sounds odd, but I deal with these situations fairly regularly (although am not any form of lawyer, this is absolutely not legal advice etc.). Contracts between international entities are common, and Apple US would not be in breach of US law but would be in breach of contract and would place Apple UK in breach of UK law by doing so.

Am not taking the UK government's side on this - I personally think the order is nuts and yep, I'm British. I'm just trying to show why the relationship would be more complex. Legally Apple US could disclose of course. However I'll bet you it has a supplier contract with Apple UK, a legally distinct entity, that says something like "the terms of this agreement will be bound by UK law". Hence it would be in breach of contract, and that could place Apple UK at legal risk in the UK.

Also, our AI doesn't just regurgitate ingested text, code and images, often poorly. It is capable enough to END HUMANITY! (buy our shares pls).

Pioneering reusable rockets, manned launches to the ISS, a super heavy lifter, lowest launch cost on the planet, a launch cadence that looks like something from an SF novel, and a satellite constellation that brings in enough money to pretty much self-fund the development of their future spacecraft. And in case anyone wants to point out their income from lucrative launch deals with the US government, one should also consider not how much those contracts are costing the US taxpayer, but how much they are saving (compared to the next cheapest launch provider).

Say what you want about Musk, SpaceX is certainly delivering the goods when it comes to space flight.

Did some reading off the back of your comment and yep - I now remember the fuss when that happened. Had totally forgotten it, Slashdot even did an article at the time. I'd so associated them with Nintendo that I got it mixed up.

Yes but RAM shortage.