The headline talks about eliminating the disease, but the body talks about stuff like reducing the number of deaths below some threshold, that doesn't sound like "elimination" to me. Am I missing something?

The problem is we don't have a control group of people who don't ingest microplastics but are otherwise the same as those who do. We can of-course compare the health of people from more and less contaminated areas, but those more and less contaminated areas will likely also differ in other ways, both known and unknown, that may have more significant effects than the microplastics.

"How did you get hired?"
"I was top at Fortnite. You?"
"Combat flight sims."

"Damn, two Boeings just crashed over an oil refinery on city limits and took out half the city."
"Did you remember to save your position beforehand?"
"Yeah."
"The reload and continue from there. No-one will notice."

I love computer games. I have XPlane 12 and many scenery packs. I rank well on Elite:Dangerous. From the sounds of it, the FAA would see me as over-qualified. In reality? There's no way in hell I'd be taking those kinds of risks with real lives. There's a huge difference between having good reflexes and a good eye, versus having the complex 4D spacetime relationship mental models needed for robust air traffic control.

Actually, without a need to pay for servers (virtual or other), it offers freedom from sponsors that want the conversation kept profitable and ad friendly.

To me it sounds like a newb wrote a web app and didn't quite know what an API is.

Did it use the API normally or did it do an SQL injection?

It's still a cloud, just one behind a military firewall.

And the AI circumvented them because of bad coding. That part of the story is not at all new.

Or more to the point, why on the open internet? Put it on 10/8 or unallocated IPv6 somewhere and VPN it through the public internet if they must.

That way, if the camera tries to phone home, it won't find a router willing to complete that call.

Banks are supposed to lend money. I just saved them the paperwork.

Of course, AI also sometimes ignores instructions. Like when an AI decided to delete a production database in spite of being told not to touch production.

The AI in the robot, of course. Because some fool granted agency to an AI.

Of course it's extreme. So is committing a crime to sign up for classes at the gym. So is starting a smear campaign to get sloppy patches into an open source project or attempting to fool a judge with fake case law. But those have all happened.

That's EXACTLY why I maintain that AI should NEVER be given agency. Don't allow it to commit code, don't allow it to interact with anyone but the user. For God's sake, don't put it in a robot.

It did hack the Gym's registration system. Perhaps not the deepest or most impressive hack, but it did circumvent the business rules in place. Surely you don't claim that letting random people on the web bounce people off of a waiting list was the intended functioning of the Gym's registration system!?!?

I maintain that the article was NOT overhyped or clickbait. I say that because apparently most people don't realize that an AI agent might randomly decide to break the law as a shortcut when you tell it to do something. They probably think nobody would be incredibly stupid enough to unleash that on an unsuspecting public (they're wrong, of course).

Remember in the X-Files when Mulder spent 24 hours trying and failing to draft an airtight wish for the genie, then ultimately decided it just wasn't feasible? That's apparently required to use an AI with agency safely. Sounds like a bad idea.

You should look up the UK's Angle Grinder Man, hero to everyone unjustly clamped.

You see, Linus has embraced transhumanism and is testing out the new kernel as a supplementary brain function, using MOSIX to offload all of the irritable comment generation at yet more nonsense on the mailing list to an Elizabot that he has written specifically to do this. This saves his actual brain for real work.