Back in 2010 I applied to a University of Washington work-compatible masters degree program in the computer science department. The counselor said it was almost all Microsoft people going through the program.

  If Microsoft and the UW create programs tailored Microsoft's needs, why not hold them near their campus? If they did hold it on the Seattle campus, it would either be in The Gates Computer Science Building or the Paul G. Allen Center for Computer Science & Engineering. I didn't make those up.

Besides, the GIX is not on the UW Seattle campus. It's in Bellevue. Moving it to Redmond doesn't seem like a deal. BTW, the GIX has a Steve Ballmer Building. It's literally called that.

Here's a riddle. If you're driving in a car, how do you know when you've crossed over from Bellevue into Redmond?

You don't. It all looks the same.

320K pounds is a pretty cheap test of the efficacy of the system. There's a lot to learn from this trial regardless if there were a thousand arrests or zero arrests.

This new feature makes me think of the "Spring Surprise" by the Whizzo Chocolate Company. This "Cell Surprise" by Microsoft.

Why haven't humanity's experiments with utopian societies worked out better? It's not like we haven't tried. Over and over. The closest successes I have seen are the anabaptists and the kibbutz. While successful, there is no shortage of hard work in their success.

I should have added that applying critical thinking and adopting a skeptical attitude will help you make good decisions in elections and many other things. AI does not change that.

This will not be the first election I will consult a chatbot. I've been using AI as a research assistant for local elections for a while now. Before chatbots I used search engines to research candidates and initiatives. And before that.... You get the idea.

If you think only chatbots are given to untruths, look at what candidates and lobbyists write in print media. It's reliably as crazy as AI hallucinations.

Sounds like we will need to go down the route of requiring warrants to access the data. If a judge can be convinced of the need to run a particular query, then law enforcement should be allowed to run that query. No warrant, no access.

Wikipedia says APIS was established by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. What in God 's name was a copy of it doing on rando Vietnamese servers? I feel that's the real story here.

I read the title and imagined a young OpenAI Montague secreting himself to the online balcony of Anthropic Capulet, whispering sweet-nothings to his computationally demanding lover. It's so romantic!

Thank you for the clarification. I read this in the wee hours of the morning. I hoped to read that a closed-form solution was discovered. Sadly, that was not the case.

Am I misreading this?
"The Navier-Stokes problem, which has no clear practical value"

The aeronautical engineers in my community might beg to differ.

When they find a gene for expression is the telekinesis, let me know. I also be interested in activating a gene for telepathy it teleportation. Actually, I think I'd take teleportation first because I'm sick of driving everywhere.

Since the ePrivacy Directive of 2009 resulted in pop-up dialogs for accepting, rejecting, or partially accepting cookies, this kind of response became completely predictable. Let's call the phenomenon "Enshitification Under Malicious Compliance," or EUMC for short.

I'm usually not one to get riled about this or that policy or agency change. But I read the summary and my first thought was "oh shit." I hope the reality of this is not as bleakly dystopian as it sound.

"flooding illegals". I pictured a big wave made of people. I've met illegal aliens, but I've yet to witness a flood of them. That would be quite a spectacle.