OMG, here we go ...

What , yes! Correct. The last hundred people to start a sentence like that were idiots, so sorry I doubted you :-)

Of course the kids are well aware of the problem. It is the subject of ongoing research, and a lot harder to fix than we'd think.

You seem to be confusing LLM with Google. It like the definition of AI is that it can tell you things not in the training data . Otherwise you just have a database.

gee, when did you get soft, caring about those elderly people. Only call them "conservative fuckwits" until they die, eh?

They died because of the hysterical over-reaction of the bureaucrats. Not because of the industrial accident.

False. Possibly one person from lung cancer 4 years later. The tsunami killed twenty thousand. Coal power emissions kill millions.

Ain't it funny how many people confidently cite Dunning-Kruger, clearly having never read the paper, and with no clue what they were actually saying?

You will be thinking of the Kramatorsk radiological accident. That was Cs137, a 30 year half-life and a gamma emitter. Scary stuff.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Who modded up this incoherent conspiracy nonsense? Fukushima Prefecture has 1.7m people. Fukushima city was never evacuated.
Several towns were, but that was a big mistake causing unnecessary harm to people.

Perhaps AC is confusing it with Chernobyl ?

Great mathematicians can certainly make major contributions late in life. Euler notably.
But like gymnastics, you have to start young.

... with identity politics?
2 Chinese-born, a woman, but poor Jacob Tsimerman doesn't rate a mention. Being Jewish doesn't make headlines when you are number 18.
Is all this really so important that it leads the reporting before any mention of what they did?

Take it easy there.
You would be familiar with the demo where you have 2 polarising filters that (ideally) block all light, but inserting a 3rd filter between them at 45 degrees allows some light through. This is used to illustrate the wave-function calculations. A common misconception is that this is evidence for the theory of QM. But actually, the observations can easily be explained by classical waves. Each filter projects the incoming field vector onto its own axis. It is evidence for QM only when quantized - passing light through as single photons and observing them individually.
  That's all we are saying. I was not judging the article or the experiment - I'll leave that to you.

What was it Bill Gates said about Steve jobs breaking into the neighbor's (Mr Xerox) house?
Or to put it more politely, we all stand on the shoulders of giants, AI included. New models (including Fable) are trained using old ones.

All research builds on old, and startup companies have never been rigorous to follow IP law. Same applies to 'start up' countries. For more than a century, the US was a global haven for literary piracy. Only after the US became a major publisher was International Copyright Act of 1891passed and enforced. China is following the same path.

But this is the first time. The other article was the result of a delayed choice quantum eraser.

Given that Anthropic open-sourced Claude Code back in March, I don't see this as a big surprise.

"quantum material" is not a technical term. I'm just going with the intent of TFA.

Sure, and we are looking for thing that cannot. The photoelectric effect would be an example, unlike polarisation. But its still not a "quantum material" in the sense of the original article.

I'd be very careful about interpreting QM as "how it works". QM is a mathematical model that makes very accurate predictions for real-world observations.