It keeps the head warm and improves mental performance. A warm head performs at a better rate. Like a warmed up body or the people doing hot yoga. I'm a more or less bald ADHD candidate and I wear buffs as "spare hair" and observe a similar effect.
There's a reason we keep ill and injured people warm.
Bottom line:
This sounds plausible IMHO.
They make really good tvs. Always get high marks no matter who rates them.
The sad part is Hisense, from China, is usually ranked near the top as well, and we know how seriously China takes privacy.
Pants on fire.
Yes, you can treat anything with any method.
No, it won't be successful.
What Would Betteridge Say?
X has now essentially paywalled everything. Unless you're one of them, you get nothing.
Of the big players, I'd say OpenAI is at the biggest risk of not really able to even stumble straight ahead, presuming stumbling/charging straight ahead is in the cards for the companies in general.
The complaint by the US congressmembers was that the UK ordered Apple explicitly not to disclose the details to the US Congress.
That is regulating Apple in the USA.
Not a non-sequitur, but the actual point of the complaint:
-The complaint by the US congressmembers was that the UK ordered Apple explicitly not to disclose the details to the US Congress.
-As Apple is a US company the US Congress has original jurisdiction. It is improper to order Apple not to respect that jurisdiction.
Someone posted more details farther downthread, with links to the actual text of the complaint letter.
I'll bite:
1) The UK is not subject to Article I of the US constitution.
1. The colonies fought a war to ensure that the USA is not subject to the jurisdiction of the UK. The UK may not regulate US entities without the consent of the US government, and the US politicians object to some of the terms of the regulations the UK is applying.
2) How's Nicolas Maduro doing these days?
2. He is doing OK, for a political prisoner. His capture was a smokescreen for the theft of Venezuelan oil production.
3) Whence derives our right to unilaterally impose economic sanctions against foreign companies, banks, and even governments?
3. WWII. The USA emerged from WWII as the strongest and most stable power remaining in the world. The other allied governments chose to back the USA as the central banking power of the world as no one else was stable enough to handle the job. The various governments could chose to change that, but the transition is not easy and thus far has not been worth the pain.
He commonly spent 8 hours a day with a laptop resting on his abdomen while being homeschooled.
Sit at a desk. Stand up. Walk to another room. Get the fuck up and move around. Go outside. Get some exercise. Real schools do not leave children in a pod all day. Homeschools should not either.
99.999% of which would be bad decisions.
It's not just about making any decisions. It's about making good ones.
Survivor bias.
You've seen the quip that goes something like: "LLMs are algorithms which produce hallucinations. Occasionally some of these hallucinations happen to be useful to humans."
So it is with people.
Our unscientific romanticism of notions like the Soul and Free Will make us retroactively ascribe Good/Bad-Decision cause-and-effect Narratives to outcomes.
100,000 people make 100,000 different decisions. Occasionally it happens that conditions in the world reward 1,000 of those decisions. Those 1,000 people then make 1,000 different secondary decisions. Occasionally it happens that conditions in the world reward 10 of those decisions. We then retroactively attribute narratives of Intelligence, Wisdom, Visionary Thinking to the 10 survivors and the animal/reptile brain kicks in with all sorts of neuroendocrine-induced reverence and casts the survivors as our bettors. We tell ourselves that the survivors deserve their rewards, because if we can believe that is true then we can believe that we too can hope to receive the rewards of Right Choices.
We are so biologically terrified to acknowledge the prospect of chaos in complex systems (such as the cosmos) that we would rather create and then worship a series of cruel and capricious Ubermenschen than live with the Conscious awareness that we are all amoeba flailing our array of pseudopods against the nature of reality. We need to believe we control the world we briefly blipped into and will soon blip back out of..
The ants that swarm your kitchen counter are there because that one explorer ant happened to go across your counter on that one time you happened to not notice that you dribbled a bit of fruit juice when you poured it two days ago. We would say that explorer ant's behavior was extremely successful. However, neither that ant - nor any of the others now spread across your counter - had Intelligence, Wisdom, or Visionary Thinking. If you had noticed the spill and wiped it up, that same ant may have expended its life and precious energy rambling around your entire kitchen finding absolutely nothing. Or falling prey to a spider. Or failing into the sink drain and drowning. Or being spotted and squished by you. The ant "made" the same "decision" and walked the same trail either way.
That laptop screen has got to be less than a foot from his eyes given where the heating pattern is. How does he even type?
Your analysis is right, but the part about "would qualify as a crime if perpetrated by a person" isn't really the key. They key is rather, that to be guilty of a crime, the perpetrator must do so intentionally...with or without a computer or AI.
If the people running the AI test *intended* to break in to other sites, they could be guilty of crimes.
They intentionally created a device that they equipped with the capacity to commit crimes. They then activated that device and it exercised its range of capacity.
If they gave a kindergartener a loaded gun and sent them to the playground, but didn't actually tell the kid to shoot anyone, then even though they equipped the kid with the capacity to kill people and understood that a kindergartener explicitly has no capacity to understand the scope of its possible behaviors, we have now learned that it's okay -- neither the parents nor the kid at any point had active intent to kill people, and therefore no crime has occurred. No intent, no crime.
The DA's hands are tied.
There's nothing the legal system can do about all the resulting dead bodies.
May the odds be ever in your favor.
What remedy does the law provide for crimes committed by a computer? Not a person using a computer. The computer itself.
What remedy does the law provide for murder committed by a 4 year old kid whose parents handed them a loaded gun and sent them to the playground? Not the parent telling the kid to murder, but the 4 year old kid itself, merely exercising the capacity its parents equipped it with?
: is not an identifier
