Obviously the switch from "loss leader on a scale the capital markets can barely absorb" to "losing money" is going to sting; but I'm curious if we'll see sneakier knock-on effects.

So long as they were losing money hand over fist the vendor does want to throw enough tokens at you to make you feel like you are having a good time; but as few as are required to do that since they lose money on every one. If they were breaking even or turning a profit the incentive would be to sneak as much spend and upsell in as possible; and it's well known that the verbosity/cost of LLM chatter is hard to predict; harder if there are multiple models and other complications being switched around in the background.

What sort of exciting little tricks will we see from vendors who actually make more if you use more?

Which is, of course, nonsense. Nothing stops you from making a copy of encrypted data. What sucks is that for a backup, you likely can't do incremental.

It is big'ish - 4GWh on an average day, or 500MW when the sun is shining, assuming 40% panel coverage. But no, it's not 7%. More like 0.014%. And the sheep or whatever they graze under it will be very happy - lots of shade, better grass.

As for your arithmetic - 2,400 acres is 3.75 sq mile. Or it's about 100 hectares, or 10 sq kilometres, or 10,000,000 sq meters. This is why the rest of the world is using metric. Imperial units make as much sense in todays world as "Drill, Baby, Drill".

That site is blocking VPN clients (sus) but here's another one you can pick up at CVS:

https://www.cvs.com/shop/ijoy-...

Imagine how much jet fuel was wasted on being stupid.

This is an example of "sometimes you can be too careful".

In your case it might simply be that there was not enough of this kind of tasks in the training data.

Exactly, we would have had cataclysmic earthquakes if the summary were correct.

The poles have shifted dramatically in recent decades and the field has weakened substantially leading to bright auroras in Florida and Hawaii at low KP numbers.

Models have the North Pole arriving at the Bay of Bengal sooner than anybody would expect. Christmas will be awkward until we change our vocabulary..

I agree in general, but not with this strong phrasing. I've let AI build a good amount of non-trivial code. But my consistent experience is that it works best when guided by an experienced coder who can correct it, and when implementing well-known algorithms rather than coming up with novel solutions.

Example: I let it write up a quadtree implementation in a language for which there was no ready solution online. It took 2-3 correcting prompts to get a good result. I could've done it myself but it would've likely taken a few hours to get it all right instead of the half or so hour it took with AI. The important part for me was that there's nothing unknown in how to implement a quadtree. All the AI needs to do is take the 100s of existing implementations and translate them into a different language.

True but too simplified. The Luddites had an entirely different motivation: The fact that factories now employed women and children at very low rates meant that the men lost their status in the family as bread winners and head of household. That was a major social disruption, which we don't have with AI.

I'd compare it more to teamsters or wagoners when cars became common. Your job is threatened by a different way of doing the same thing, a way to which your skills don't cleanly transition. Some choose to pick up the new tech, some want the old ways to persist.

In the end, coachmen became chauffeurs, because rich people prefer to be driven around oder driving themselves, no matter if it's a horse or an engine doing the pulling. But much fewer teamsters and wagoners became truck drivers.

Very similar here.

Somebody said the new movie has a fifty year old baby as a main character which is supposedly their key demographic.

It's 12/days old

https://youtu.be/jqcuqWTxTNw

but this is the first I've heard of it.

I'll suggest folks light up his torrent before the sharks start circling (and to help his bandwidth costs).

"This belongs in a museum!"

BOTH of them? :-)

Everyone knows that 10x engineers validate inputs and carefully manage dependencies; so clearly there's no risk of unexpected behavior.

It seems worth noting that one of the items in Wyden's rather pointed inquiry is the fact that the feasibility of doing this is known to have been demonstrated for the DoD by outside people familiar with it at least as early as 2016; so while this is the first confirmed case of adversarial use it's the outcome of at least a decade of just ignoring the problem; and a significantly longer period of failing to reasonably anticipate the problem. It's not like there's No Such Agency you could ask about "how could you spy on someone with the internet even?" if you wanted to know how well or poorly readily available information matched a nation state signals intelligence apparatus.

Purely as a matter of cellphones being expensive and somewhat tepidly capable in the before times I assume that there was a period within living memory when merely telling people not to Gordon Gekko on their DynaTAC where the russians can hear you was good enough; but that would have clearly and rapidly been getting less true for at least a quarter century.

Can we keep the Rust team busy with porting them?

We can't allow this to stand having MCA token ring drivers in C.