Sounds like connecting to those would be something Vizio would pay money for.

I don't see Comcast turning down that money.

I'm sure a lot of it is for prestige, basically a very complex PR move. At a time when their main adversary is bringing back measles and public executions, it would stand in contrast to that as a vision of human achievement.

I could also think of military applications for a moonbase, although I didn't think too hard on them.

How much has your government money grown in that time?

At my high school, blocking Livejournal taught an entire generation how to utilize HTTP proxies.

You actually have no way to know whether or not Astra "figured" it out, and the evidence is that it could have- if you had been bothered to read.
Was Qwen's model card in Astra's weights? Probably.
Can Astra also design networks *from scratch* to solve problems? Yes. Can it troubleshoot other problems using mechanistic interpretability? Yes.

So no, it's not like saying that. Your analogy is as dim-witted as you are.

One thing everybody wants: quick and accurate answers to their questions.

Of course, no publisher wants to provide this. They want to make you pay for a subscription and/or buy books or articles and also assault you with ads as your route around through their site trying to find the answer you care about.

I can't blame the publishers....their business is selling information. If they can't profit on that, then there will be no publishing, and that would clearly be worse.

I can't blame Google for trying to circumvent this; their business is giving you quick access to information (in return for behavior tracking and their own ad viewing, of course).

Personally, I think the world would be a better place if we could get quick and easy answers to all of our (legal) questions. A better profit model for this is clearly what is needed. I am just hoping they can invent one as a result of this clash.

Aside: Gemini's answers are often harmfully inaccurate, and it will directly contradict itself depending on how you phrase the question. In theory this means the publishers shouldn't have to worry, because everybody will realize this and just stop using Gemini. In practice, the promise of a quick answer often overrides people's skepticism and prevents them from demanding references and proof, thus sending them astray. That problem needs a solution too.

Your emphasis is irrelevant.
The fact that the exemption is an affirmative defense does not change the meaning of the statute-
Your fair use rights, which derive from the first amendment, directly override copyright rights.
The fact that you have to assert them in court is meaningless.

My fair use can give me permission to use your copyrighted work.
Nothing about your copyrighted work can take away my fair use.

Ergo, and I quote:

I think you're being overly sensitive, and it's causing a dip in your ability to think critically.

What's newsworthy, is that the effective reasonbliteration was quarter-backed by an LLM, including the interpretability portion, and the modifications.
It did this to make a functional improvement to a specific metric after it was identified as the reason the metric was struggling.

The headline: MIT Researchers used GPT 6 Astra to edit Qwen's Open Weights Directly Boosting Math Scores is accurate.
Your proposed headline is also accurate, but it leaves out what's noteworthy and the goal.

That's exactly how it's done. It's a pretty old process for trying to hack out censorship from the models.
It works, but only kinda.

Functionally incorrect. Roughly equivalent to saying, "Synapses are just chemical transmitters".

Is this an actual question?
"Why do we practice for the game when we can just get some individual coaching on our 3-pointer?"

You really are a fucking idiot.

For me the robotics vs laundry issue is ironing, not folding. It might be different in the US but I don't do a lot of laundry folding here in the UK - I just hang them up in the wardrobe or put them in drawers. Towels and spare sheets maybe? Not much.

But an ironing robot - yes, that one I would interested in. It needn't be some humanoid thing that stands by an ironing board and moves a traditional steam iron up and down - could be a static cupboard for all I care. There was a spate of announcements about 10 years ago but nothing came of them, only these blow-up air pressure ones that don't really work at all on work-style clothing. Ironing robots please.

Idiotic.

90% of game developers are using coding agents.
Cite examples? Any game that's been released since 2022 that you didn't think was shit. It used AI, almost without exception.

Debatable. I've found things in my refrigerator that I cannot rule out consciousness for, and indeed civilization, outright.

Spot on.

You're an idiot.

If you anthropomorphize the term "learn", then you're correct. They learn nothing.
But then again, at that point, a heuristic spam filter learns nothing either, and yet we have called that learning for 30 years.
So, accepting that this level of flexibility is allowed for the word "learn", we can accept that the backpropagation is, in fact, learning.

Further, "learning" is the exact fucking opposite of novelty. It pains me that people as stupid as you have the boldness to share your half-baked opinions.