Someone hasn't flown in a while.

I don't click the cheapest price. What happened is that the major airlines have copied some (not all) of the budget airline shit. Luggage used to be included, now it's an extra - which causes people to bring carry-on to the max instead, which leads to the overhead compartments always being full.

Yeah, good point. No, wait, that's complete bullshit.

I've taken a number of trips on business class in the past years. What you get in business class today is what you got in economy class 20, 25 years ago.

You know what, you may actually be right if you compare multi-thousand halfway-around-the-world intercontinental flights. I've never flown to Australia, so I can't compare that. I'm talking about shorter flights (a few hours) which I do frequently and where I can compare. We might both be right.

Why is their AI having trouble identifying emergency barriers, uniformed people making hand-signals, big puddles, and emergency vehicles? It doesn't seem like the kind of thing AI typically fails at.

Maybe the bot-car should ask the passengers for help if not sure. I suspect it often over-identifies such that engineers turned down the reaction threshold. Instead, try asking the damned humans. "Possible emergency situation ahead. I plan to stop and wait. Please confirm if this is a the proper action. Press 'Other' for other options."

What country's leaders wouldn't want similar goon-modes embedded?

Almost all models are confused about their identity.

Queue "woke" jokes in 3...2...1...

As more products and services have software and bots developed in unfriendly nations, the US banning them could put the USA at an economic disadvantage to nations that allow them. I'm not disputing its a legitimate concern, only saying the tradeoff may grow harsher over time.

We are already paying much more for EVs than we otherwise could. (Although part of that is from trade disputes rather than concerns over rogue XiWare.)

Maybe the military's plan for extra thick shielding is why Space-X is building such large rockets. Elon may be using manned missions largely as guise.

> if you think "being a sexual tease" is a bad thing, you could think that.

The implication was that is the only or default way women would build a system. If he said "it was programmed on a planet known for its pleasure industries" then it would play better.

Finally a real populist.

He sure is getting MAGA panties in bunches.

So... ordinary airport before enshitification ?

Air travel used to be pretty cool. Now absolutely every part of it is annoying. Especially the booking and its 25 upsale offers.

A few years more of this and you'll have to book business just to get a seat and fresh air.

EM drives were intended for interstellar travel, not Earth orbit. The very slight but constant acceleration was claimed to get one close to the speed of light in a few years.

Spock's implication was that if not tempered by men, women would speak overly sexual. The two assumptions here is that first, women need to be tempered by men, and second that left on their own they'd become sexual teases. One fluffs the male ego, the other fluffs men's sexual fantasies.

Didn't work out well for the Enterprise.

(Warning: clip is misogynistic. The visitor asking about the computer is from our time, by the way.)

The proposed technique may detect existing weapons, but how feasible is it to make an undetectable formula?

This is akin to altering the English alphabet such that quantity and shape of symbols in the alphabet is different before teaching students English

No, it's not. It's akin to having secret numbers (that correlate neither with the spelling or meaning of the word) associated with each word, and the only way you can learn the secret numbers is if e.g. someone says "The secret number for Strawberry is '3'."

There are no other "clues" available to the LLM. It cannot see the property in question (spelling). It is a hidden "magic number" for all effects and purposes.

as there are daily videos of people doing this exact shit?

Literally go to a non-tiny AI right now and try it. Your pick. Try all the major ones - ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, your pick. Then share me a link to the failure case you're claiming you'll get. Don't worry, I'll wait.

(Note: tiny: the "Google Answers" AI is a truly minuscule model, the sort of thing you could run on a cellphone with ample capacity to spare, and is only representative of minuscule models)

how about the guy that put 3 AIs together and told them to count to 100?

Sounds like what you actually have a complaint about is the (non-AI) voice interface they're linked to, because that's what screwed them. That entire premise doesn't work at all if you remove it and just do the test in text. Again: try it yourself.