If these humanoids are sufficiently human-like, every car is an autonomous vehicle.

Certification is necessary in almost all industries from construction, engineering to medicine. This incident makes wonder whether some serious disaster would result from AI generate code and then the society wakes up to require every line of code be written by human.

When I was in Beijing in 1990s, it was quite dry in the suburb where you could see farm lands. In summer 2024, I visited again and was surprised by how green and dense the vegetation was. Looking up online using AI, based on reports from the Beijing government web site, Beijing's underground water levels have rebounded significantly from historic lows, showing a rising trend. The lowest point was about 25.75 meters in 2015. It has risen approximately 9.64 meters to 16.11 meters by 2021 and continued climbing to roughly 12.83 meters in March 2025. By October 2025, the water table was reported at an average depth of 10.82 meters. This recovery is credited to water conservation efforts and water from the South-to-North Water Diversion Project.

My conspiracy theory is that some GenAI business plans to monetize the content which nobody else can have now. A lot of money may be changing hands for this.

I have been teaching Rust to college students since 2020. It gets the pointer concept and uses right, i.e. the right (or best so far) balance between correctness and flexibility. In comparison, C++ is all flexibility and no real correctness guarantee. As a result, parallelization for Rust is a small step. For C++, it is almost impossible. Anyone who thinks Rust is equivalent to modern C++ is delusional.

Assume the current AI tool is as good or better than human. What happen in the future when an update of the algorithm or tool, an improvement or twist or fix, leaves a corner case terribly wrong for a small group of patients? AI is the ultimate group-think.

I think this is dumb, and the world is paying the price for this stupidity.

I have done many such reviews. Unlike in math, a reviewer can check the logic and derivation fully. In sciences, one can't check the result of an experiment unless one conducts it, which reviewers typically don't do. What they check is whether there is enough information for someone else to repeat the experiment.

makes money from people who use your product to kill other people---and they are of course bad people and deserve to die. Lucrative and one can sleep well knowing he's making the world a better place.

Sorry I don't see the sanity of cheering on a crowd-funded open-source software used by one people to kill other people. If this becomes acceptable, everyone in the future can be on the receiving end. Am I right or am I insane?

So far so good.

Where is the evidence of this? Do you know how many lives China lost to SARS and if you do, do you still think the Wuhan lab would treat this with anything but the highest level of security and containment? China, if nothing else (lacking creativity, copying etc etc), can get quality control right.

Scanning through comments here and the numerous ones I have seen, there seems to be a predilection to invasion and problem-solving employing war on other countries by the populous here. We see others not as they are but as we are.

Many people here don't see the reason for China not to approve western mRNA vaccine. Think about why US banned Huawei. Do you really think China would allow US bio tech, which it has limited info and doesn't manufacture and can be taken away unilaterally, be injected into its people bloodstream?

Throw it away and (online) order the next version.

Reading the news text, I knew someone would be sure to jump out and write something to make general statements about China and the people there. Here we are.