Bingo, I think you nailed it. Starbucks wants to sell you those fancy syrupy latte caramel drinks, and to get any coffee flavor at all after they add all the sugary sweet gunk and cream, they need a super dark roast.

If you just want coffee, not a desert-in-a-cup, go anywhere else. Your local indy coffeehouse, for example.

Simply not true. Beneficial effects of coffee have been known for decades. This work is simply confirming what previous studies have already shown.
  https://time.com/4116129/coffe...
  http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/...
  http://www.npr.org/sections/th...
  https://www.medicalnewstoday.c...

This mostly isn't new, just confirming what has been seen in studies going back decades https://time.com/4116129/coffe...

But an important question is, what do they define as a "cup"?

Years back, a "cup" of coffee was defined as a teacup, maybe five ounces. When I drink coffee, I use a coffee mug, which is perhaps twice the size of a teacup. Maybe more, for some of the extra-large coffee mugs.

I took a quick scan through the paper, searching on "cup", but didn't see an actual cup volume given.

My point is that if that low-level stuff is what makes C fun to you, then Rust and C++ will be fun, too... but without all of the drudgery and error-prone crap C makes you do.

If that's not what makes C fun to you, then what is? It's certainly not being able to accomplish a lot quickly; higher-level languages are much better for that.

It sounds like you said it is simultaneously far left and far right?

This is so weird. I haven't visited the site the early Afghan War, maybe early Iraq War era, but I remember it being rather US-jingoistic, pretty right wing? And the site tilt was pretty heavily "white American male" not a famously left-wing demographic.

Meh, I knew of Fark back when all that was at the site was a single photo of a squirrel with large genitals.

I used to play on the mud Three Kingdoms in the mid '90s, and Drew was a Wizard (admin) there (named "Cletus"). When Fark became a link aggregator, I used to visit for the Photoshop contests (then ended up drifting off to Worth1000 when that became a thing). I'm not surprised that he ended up launching a porn site, because, well, Drew, but they launched a TV service that ended up getting gobbled up by Adult Swim? Weird.

Crazy to see all of the stuff that's happened with the site since I left; it entirely dropped off my radar.

It is (or at least can be), among other things, a good search engine.

With the exception of the Jacobian conjecture, none of these have any practical applications. But it is mistake to think that these problems were not solved previously due there not being any "good reason" to solve them. All of these were well known problems where major mathematicians had worked on them. Erdos 1196 was a problem which saw a lot of work by Jared Lichtman who is one of the leading young number theorists now. The other problems are even more so. Both the unit distance problem and the double cycle cover conjecture were problems that had many mathematicians work on, and the Jacobian conjecture is a problem where many people have had partial results about it and where people have spent years solving special cases.

The rest of your post isn't on the topic in question, but is about broader issues with AI, which may be valid, and may be worth discussing. There's no question that there are some pretty serious negatives. To use one personally annoying example, my spouse works in a library and she has to deal with trying to explain to patrons that just because ChatGPT said a book exists doesn't mean the book is real. But the point of my comment remains focusing on the claim that these systems are " aren't creative they're just really really fancy search engines that regurgitate what they have ingested." That's not accurate, and the results in math show that. And if we are going to understand these systems, both their positives and negatives, we need to understand their capabilities.

Are we still saying this? These systems have solved a wide variety of open math problems some of which were borderline famous. Erdos 1196 https://www.erdosproblems.com/1196 was one of the first. Then the Unit Distance Conjecture https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.20695 . Then the Double Cycle Cover Conjecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycle_double_cover. And now most recently, one of these systems came up with a counterexample to the Jacobian conjecture https://mathoverflow.net/a/513385/127690, a conjecture which is old and famous enough that I've literally talked about it in class when I've taught linear algebra. At least in pure math, these capabilities are well beyond being mere regurgitation. It is likely that's the case in other fields as well, and this is just one where it is slightly easier (due to the completely self-contained nature of the problems and the nature of mathematics) and where it is easier to see that it really has done something notable.

The problem is that people don't know how to use it yet. EXPECT most attempts to fail. Most early attempts to use computers failed.

Of course, with AI the problem's a bit worse because it keeps changing so rapidly. Currently the rule of thumb is "You can train an AI do do a good job if it's easy to verify that a proposed solution is correct.",

You already acknowledged the catch when you said "Or, at least, any new ones.". Small groups are really much more interested in the kind that were useful in WW I, because those are easier to make. Doing development for new weapons is dangerous to the developer.

If IQ were valid, it wouldn't be particularly low. Unfortunately, it's sensitive to culture and education, so you are probably right. But don't confuse it with potential intelligence. IQ is basically a measure of how well you could do in school with reasonable effort, so if you didn't pay attention last year, your IQ is lower.

That said, intelligence *is* real. It's just that IQ is a really bad measure of it.

Called standard by who? I guess we shouldn't call the Imperial units, though. But I've *never* heard them called "standard" before.

I really doubt that it's the largest single market. I suspect that's China. The US and India are probably up there in the running too.