Well, let's test your logic. Saying hearts can't do math is the same thing as saying people can't do math, because a heart is a subset of a person. Or how about this one ... saying that the Amygdala can't do math is the same thing as brains can't do math because the Amygdala is a subset of the brain. How about claiming that saying databases can't serve web pages is the same as saying a webserver can't serve web pages because databases are a subset of a web stack. Herp Derp.

MOAR POWAH = faster magic smoke production! Efficiency!1!!

It seems like you would have to take a special course to learn how to be as misinformed as you are. How do you do it? It is truly impressive in an inverse corollary way.

Let me guess ... you don't know how to read?

In order to believe your ridiculous claim you pretty much have to go out of your way in search of misinformation at this point. Leaving aside the fact that you don't know the difference between an LLM and a frontier AI model, you also have to know nothing about actual documented proof, time and again, that they have arrived at completely non-novel innovative solutions to real world challenges with zero human intervention.

Wow. You are seriously jealous of her. She was never going to pay you any attention. Just get over it.

Are you trying to be obtuse or are you really as clueless as your comment indicates? Do you really think you can build strawmen to attack Sabine and none of her subscribers will be smart enough to see it?

No. She isn't wrong about the fact that most science "breakthroughs" don't pass the smell test these days. She doesn't get everything correct (nobody does and she would be the first to tell you she isn't always right), but she does a good job of playing devil's advocate in a world full of clueless pom pom wielding science cheerleaders who have no idea what they are talking about. A lot of sexist white men don't like the fact that she is much smarter than they are, and a lot of others don't like the fact that she calls them out on their bullshit. She rightly points out that science these days is about getting funding, and if some science happens to occur along the way then that is fine with them too.

I can't tell if you aren't smart enough to understand Sabine and Weinstein, simply don't understand the information available, or have been watching idiots like Sean Carrol, but you are completely off base. String Theory is what has been debunked, and it is a well known fact that scientists have not been doing very much real science for decades. String theory is just maths masturbation and it has set back physics by decades. If you don't believe me ask Roger Penrose. Most of the "scientific breakthroughs" that get reported are total bullshit, and Sabine is an excellent source for understanding why that is often the case.

Go remove the battery cable to do some electrical work on your car and then let us now how that works out for you.

Cable is desperately trying to retain regulatory capture in an effort to save a dying business model.

I read that whole summary and had no clue what the hell HubSpot is.

Not by asking Alexa to do it anymore, that's for sure.

You aren't paying for seniors. You are partying the government to replace the money the government stole from seniors.

Why wouldn't I say it may cure cancer? You are obviously painfully unaware of the many benefits AI has already afforded and have no understanding of it at all. This is not to say that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks, because nobody knows if that will turn out to be true or not at this point, but if you really think AI is all downside and zero benefits you are woefully ignorant. I personally believe it *might* destroy the human race, but I've been reading a lot of Slashdot comments today so I'm having a hard time deciding if that is a plus or a minus.