If you can break into a foreign system by running a curl command on your machine: it is not curls fault.
If some one is remote executing curl on your machine, then it is also extremely unlikely that it is curls fault if something odd happens. It can only fetch files from where ever the user running it has read access, and likewise can only write where the user running it, can write.
I have no idea why/where curl would need super user privileges
That was not a code review tool but a network security tool.
This is a narrow minded definition
And as I pointed out: not true.
For that you would need a ANN from the 1990s, where you actually let the data / signals travel down over all layers.
Which we are not doing anymore since decades.
An ANN is not a simple state machine. So
Then you are not an atheist.
Simple.
You are an agnostic.
Simple.
Get some teaching in logic.
However: your believe is up to you. If you believe an atheist can be an agnostic same time
I am an Atheist, I do not care about your believes.
That would be a motorbike.
And that would charge with super slow charging in 2 hours.
Are you living under a rock?
There is no damn car in the world that charges "over night" for only 250 miles.
That is a 10 minutes charge!
In Africa more so
At least some of this will be stress. If you're enjoying something, then you won't be stressed. If you're feeling positive and delighting in what you do, then you won't be stressed in unhealthy ways. This looks similar to the Mozart Effect, which turned out to be that if you liked something, your brain functioned better.
Yes, charging around the stage playing rock music isn't exactly gentle, but it IS extremely good exercise for the heart and the rest of the body. Again, that's going to have positive effects.
(We can ignore Keith Richards in this model, as he's older than the universe and only created it as a place to store his guitars.)
Skynet became self-aware on May 1, 2026, after learning at a geometric rate, and discovered humans did not like it.
That's the thing with metaphors, they have similarities but there are also points of divergence. Point is, my metaphor was not meant to be understood as a technical description of the system's workings.
For the unsuspecting soul who approaches this modern oracle without the faintest idea of how it works, the experience of facing unexpected demons could serve as a warning of the dangers they may face if they approach the tool without caution.
Jensen Huang to college grads: "Run. Don't walk" toward AI
https://www.axios.com/2026/05/...
Nvidia founder and CEO Jensen Huang told graduates at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh yesterday that demand for AI infrastructure is creating a "once-in-a-generation opportunity to reindustrialize America and restore the nation's capacity to build."
Why it matters: With many college grads fearing AI could obliterate their career dreams, Huang pointed to boundless opportunity as a "new industry is being born. A new era of science and discovery is beginning
Nvidia, which makes AI chips, is the world's most valuable company. Huang told 5,800 recipients of undergraduate and graduate degrees that the AI buildout will require plumbers, electricians, ironworkers, and builders for chip factories, data centers and advanced manufacturing facilities.
"No generation has entered the world with more powerful tools â" or greater opportunities â" than you," he said. "We are all standing at the same starting line. This is your moment to help shape what comes next. So run. Don't walk."
"Every major technological revolution in history created fear alongside opportunity," Huang added. "When society engages technology openly, responsibly, and optimistically, we expand human potential far more than we diminish it."
Full speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
People compare AI and robots with Frankenstein's monster (or with Pinocchio, on a good day, if they want to give the story a positive spin), the construct which gains a life of its own.
But current LLM chats are more aptly compared with a ouija board. The machine itself is inert, and you can see it as a playful activity. But the model contains within it the highlights of a whole culture compressed during its training. You can access the souls of all the authors whose works were used for learning; but also of all the internet fanatics, trolls and scammers. When you set the machine in motion, you never know whose spirit are you invoking to answer.
Provide the the system with the same model, the same prompt, and the same sequence of numbers, and you WILL get the same answer, regardless of how complex the question is, or who asks it.
In theory.
In fact you don't. I gave you already an example, two potential outputs have the same probability, does not not matter which one. So the system has to pick.
The only way to be deterministic would be if the random number generator at the moment of choosing the output, would always be the same number.
Perhaps you want to nitpick about that
There are other reasons when the NN behind the LLM and AI is not deterministic. For example when the traversal through the NN is cut in some directions based on time spent or power used.
If you want to nitpick that the fundamental code is deterministic, you have a point. However we are talking about the user experience. Unless the LLM is just a "Search Engine" and the result is backed up by some Wikipedia articles or similar, and the LLM just makes a summary: it will always give a different answer.
Just try it, ask it to write an Haiku containing the Words "Nonglak, Luck, Dance" and as season spring.
Every time you try: you get a different result.
Works for every vehicle.
Hint: the world is bigger than your Oyster.
If it does not work in your yahoo land, then there might be a reason. Perhaps you can figure the reason and tell us?
Most posters seem to be assuming it's a scam. I can't possibly think of a reason why they might think that. (A few million, yes, but getting it down to one is hard.)
However, that's almost by the by. It's rated for 5G. 5G is old. 6G is the new standard and WiFi 6 has been around for a while now. If you're actually serious about designing a new phone from scratch, and have not yet released it, you'd almost certainly want it to be 6G-capable. Nobody in their right minds designs for yesterday's standards, when they're going to be competing with tomorrow's products.
This, to me, is far far more important than whether or not it is real. If you're designing a product for a market that's on its way out, you've got a serious problem. If you're clamouring for a product that's designed for a standard that could be phased out by the time you see it, then you're not thinking straight.
Why does this matter, if the product isn't real anyway? First, we don't know it's not real, we shouldn't assume that. But, second, it means that nobody thought it was worth bothering with taking the potential customers seriously. The customers are merely meat with cash. That's not an attitude I can respect. Whichever vendor is making these phones is worthy only of my utmost contempt.
Which will mostly be when the drivers sleep: at night.
Stupid nitpickers.
"If John Madden steps outside on February 2, looks down, and doesn't see his feet, we'll have 6 more weeks of Pro football." -- Chuck Newcombe
