Granted it's in a different discipline, but the instructor having to use AI to write backs up the claim that people are forgetting things by using AI. It's a bit ironic for other reasons, but still supports the point.
Is using AI to help edit worse than using Gramatik or a spell checker or a buddy?
"the FCC said the gigabit speed goal is not 'technologically neutral,' suggesting that it isn't fair to other, slower technologies."
DEI is evil when applied to people but is glorious when applied to network technologies.
Are they turning this on with or without permission of the customer? Would they tell you if they did it on their own?
Maybe it's in the terms of service. Comcast could monetized this data stream by selling to burglars who wish to increase their operational efficiency by identifying people on vacation. If this works out well, maybe Comcast could take a cut of the proceeds.
With all that said, the study does mention that children exposed to less sugar in early childhood appeared to have longer telemeres and that there is likely the smoking gun on the early childhood / sugar link, as theres a pretty well established link between telemere length and cancer succeptibility in late life. Essentially the telemeres are the caps on the end the genomes, and the longer they are, the better protected the ends of the genome are from copying errors. Its also closely associated with the hayflick limit (essentially how many copies a cell can make before it shits the bed).
This is the one really interesting part of the study, or rather would be. However, even the abstract of the paper (which is paywalled) doesn't distinguish between sugar-deprived children who later increased sugar intake and those that didn't. Are the health effects still evident with sugar deprivation during childhood followed by higher sugar intake during adulthood? Or are the cardiometabolic disease, cancer, and telemere length effects mostly due to adult behavior, even if that adult behavior is influenced by childhood habits?
"loans to extend their monthly rent payment for a few weeks"
Instead of extending credit with an interest rate benefiting the creditor, how about having the borrower prepay the money and have the creditor pay an interest rate benefiting the borrower. We could call the creditor a "bank" and the scheme a "savings account."
Customers can be reassured that the Facewatch system has a 99.98% accuracy rate, and every match is reviewed by a trained manager.
A 99.98% accuracy rate will be wrong 1 out of 5,000 times. That's perhaps an acceptable Russian roulette probability for an individual, but for the store, that means hundreds (thousands?) of incorrectly identified people daily. If a person triggers the algorithm, what is the trained manager supposed to do? Is there a computer photo that the person can be compared against, or does the manager go with his Spidersense?
The biggest risk for students is an unmotivated student paired with unmotivated or incompetent teachers and resources. This has always been true, and nothing changes with AI. For motivated students, AI provides yet another resource that can be extremely useful, e.g., as a cheaper and more available tutor, but these students always found ways to learn even before AI or computers. For unmotivated students, AI could be used for cheating, but with or without cheating, the presence of AI for these students does nothing and changes nothing.
Perhaps AI might change the distribution of grades, as some cheaters will receive higher grades. However, cheating is as old as time, and grade redistribution due to cheating has likewise always existed.
This is just yet another way to inflate grades. Since the reputation of universities is not at all dependent on GPAs, there is zero risk for universities to inflate grades. Conversely, deflating grades leads to upset parents who send their donations and tuition dollars elsewhere.
This actually seems like a win-win situation. The students, parents, and university administrators and accountants are all happier. The future prospective employers are hopefully all smart enough to not base hiring decisions on fractions of GPA points, so it doesn't negatively affect the companies either.
So, in addition to badly trailing Nvidia in the AI GPU market, AMD is also aiming to badly trail Google, et al. in the ASIC space. The biggest customers for AI ASICs are the companies that design the ASICs themselves. That makes sense because those companies know exactly what they want the chips to do. It makes no sense for them to buy those chips from a third party because they already shift much of the supposedly non-core chip design to Broadcom, Marvell, or another company. ASICs only make sense in essentially embedded systems, so they make no sense to sell as a general, pre-designed processor. That's why GPUs are for.
"If you want to ban profiting from the failure of clinical trials, you would start with the stock market, where the financial incentive for this type of profit is orders of magnitude larger," said Kalshi spokesman Jack Such, pointing to stock market short sellers who have profited from clinical trial failures. "While Kalshi and the stock market are the same in this regard, they do differ in one important way: the stock market doesn't give any valuable information to researchers," Such said.
Many companies prohibit employees from doing anything with their company stock other than holding the stock long. No shorting. No margin. No options. Why? One thing is to eliminate the incentive to manipulate their work for their own personal financial benefit. So, if Kalshi were serious about the stock market comparison, they would prohibit any employee, experimental subject, or others connected to the clinical trial from participating in Kalshi bets on that trial.
I have a solution for this.
And by that I mean an idea that these idiots could use to protect media like that, and still be capable of using it themselves.
Or use streaming. One-to-one from the studio to Netflix. The studio gives Netflix the app with trivial authentication. Cheaper and easier than sending drives through the mail.
Just because Google is cheating doesn't mean it's an insurmountable task to make an autonomous vehicle that drives slightly better than humans do.
What does "drive better than humans" mean? Drive better in all possible scenarios? That's likely impossible now and probably forever. Maybe driver better in a majority of scenarios weighted by occurrence probability? Maybe, but we don't currently have the technology to validate this requirement.
Currently, we can cherry pick scenarios where some autonomous vehicles perform better or worse than the best drivers. What does that mean? Well, not much as a generalization for all AVs in all scenarios. Certainly any comparison to the worst drivers is useless. Comparisons to the "average" driver are also useless because the most average driver profiles are heavily skewed by the worst drivers. Can any AV currently perform better than the best human drivers? I would be shocked if that were the case.
Swaps are defined broadly in US law to include contracts in which payment "is dependent on the occurrence, nonoccurrence, or the extent of the occurrence of an event or contingency associated with a potential financial, economic, or commercial consequence."
So, casinos just need to define card table game moves as swaps, and all pesky state laws regarding these games can easily be struck down and moved to the more friendly confines of the CFTC. If there is a pesky requirement that swaps be technically tradeable , I'm sure there's an in-house technology workaround for that. If the pesky requirement requires actually trading, that also would be easy to surmount with an in-house technology workaround.
The very (false, but that's besides the point) narrative that "you can shit on christians all day long", "but not some other religions" is literal and fundamental example of identity politics.
There are a lot of specific nuances here about religious criticism, aspersions, parody, etc. Jews - not tolerated in the US, not just conversationally but with legal and other consequences. Muslims - selectively tolerated or not, depending on the audience, generally with little or no legal consequences. Mormons - tolerated all day long and sometimes rewarded, such as on Broadway.
AI is better and faster than humans: in the areas where it is better and fast.
Also: it opens paths, we yet right now can not do without AI.
AI is not a single entity. It will not completely work or not work. Some things will work and others not. Some things will make money and others not.
The biggest takeaway from the original comment about Apple watching AI burn is that Apple has not stepped firmly into AI. So, it will not suffer for those AI things that don't work, and it won't profit from those AI things that do work.
We often use AI LLM chatbots as the face of AI. However, that's a misleading broad generalization. As one example of AI that currently works (but may not necessarily be profitable on a standalone basis), imagine if Apple cancels AI photo imaging while Android phones continue support.
The Tao is like a glob pattern: used but never used up. It is like the extern void: filled with infinite possibilities.
