Flaring here is a verb, not a noun, and it might be the wrong word to use but they probably mean it as the nose catching the air, the way a flaring skirt does.
Odo has a kill count of one, or many, depending how you look at it: the ambassador's clone, Martok's clone, the sick changeling, and then Laas. He's a menace.
Evangelizing llms is pretty much all you do on here, you have spent an enormous amount of time and effort on them. If you're not even willing to accept that you have sunk costs relating to genai, your stating "I'm not insecure about this" is really not compelling.
They are really not that distinct, all the models cheat off each other just like they cheat copyrights.
The entire premise of chatbots is to have a simple natural-language interface instead of those scary GUIs and programming languages. The idea that maybe they didn't know enough about how to interact with ai, and that's why it failed to help them, is a little silly, and the more you explain how we're all using ai wrong, the sillier you look.
You've obviously sunk a lot of costs into genai, both in time and money, and that is making you defensive. Somebody that isn't impressed by Claude premium isn't going to do any of what you suggest, let alone get any more value out of it, and that's valid for them. You're not seriously interested in helping them professionally, you are just insecure.
Your replying to someone as if they are the embodiment of this forum makes you look like a contrarian asshole. You are in the forum, forumizing. Stop acting like you're better than anyone else here, or that this is a monolith you're speaking to instead of a collection of individuals with diverse opinions.
Criticizing a renowned doctor who refused to publicly give a medical diagnosis about someone who isn't a patient of theirs, and then making that judgement yourself based on youtube hot takes is not professional investigatory work, it's sloppy and ill-timed.
"It's not about x, it's about y" is always suspect, there can be multiple reasons for anything, and in this case the former is racism and the latter is a disease you looked into a little online.
Saying "he actually did a lot of harm" is dismissive toward ongoing debates in the academic and black and black academic communities, it's saying 'none of that harm was real, but look at this other community I'm also not a part of being harmed'.
To be clear, you are probably right, I mean, it was always an incredible story, I also assumed it was at least slightly bullshit, but I just think investigating whether people are as autistic as they say they are is a bad path to go down. You yourself said that autistic people sometimes feel a need to exaggerate their symptoms in order to get recognition of their disability, and with Arday you might think we have a prime example of that, yet without evidence or credentials, you say he was actually neurotypical, giving us a prime example of why autistic people sometimes do this.
OK, maybe, but I hate that. It's fucking over the ability for journalists to benefit from scoops, from doing longer and deeper investigations. People who don't understand the value of asking questions are not exactly on a path of self reflection.
Where is it needed? Where do we need more covert racism and poor reasoning? Which part of the media ecosystem is running low on lies and clickbait?
If my friend sent me a long retelling of a wedding I missed and inside the message there was a weirdly placed hyperlink to a public post, by one of the bridesmaids or whatever, that had more info and pictures and a different interpretation of events, and then I find out my friend never went to the wedding, and actually never met the couple, I would be upset. Is all I'm saying. I don't see a need for it.
We all say protect journalism, it's dying... But, fuck these basement dwellers, if you want my respect as a journalist, do some journalism. I know Reason actually does have journalists, they might suck or not I'm not sure, but this here is not a piece of journalism.
It's very common, not just in forums, but I don't like when people share things with me without doing the bare minimum of clicking on the hyperlink to the original reporting, the primary source, the first version of history. It's not that difficult, they obscure it a little sometimes, it might even require an internet search or two. But it puts more attention and focus on the people actually investigating those in power instead of those that just sit on the sidelines and produce hate porn to steal all the air in the room.
We need to separate two concepts with the AI conversation. Is it a real technology? Yes, it is. And it works, often. It isn't the scifi world ending technology they want you to believe in, but damn can it make an android app quickly. And get most of the buttons right, if you test it enough and ask nicely.
False, it's able to fool c-suite execs and gullible rubes into thinking they can build an app. In reality, these vibe coding projects all fall apart. Zitron relies on Nik Suresh's arguments, which I agree with, that software development: shipping, running, and supporting software, is a hell of a lot more than just code.
The bad quality of the code and resulting app is really a secondary discussion to whether this can really count as software development. One of my favorite software development tools of the last decade is actually a Microsoft standard called LSP, which allows text editors to talk to compilers to get code suggestions and linting as you type. You used to have to use an 'integrated' text editor, or IDE, that usually only worked with one or a handful of languages. Now, everyone can use their editor of choice.
The ai craze, to me, is much lower in productivity gains than LSP for software development, it might be negative because you are handing off the one part of software development that ties all of its subdisciplines together. It's crazy how fast the industry standard went from 'clean code' and concerns about whitespace, furiously tracking issue lifetimes, to just throwing up their hands, actively telling people not to care. I hate both paradigms, to be clear, but at least they were trying to measuring things in the former.
Opinion piece, OpenAI's opinion, I guess, and presented in the form of an actual reporter interview. It's wild how much the former board member is able to stretch OpenAI's depiction of what happened into a false narrative of accelerating gains and apocalypsism, given she tried to get rid of Altman before the llm craze. That's dedication, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that even the 'good' board members were dumb.
Calling him exonerated is a stretch. Choosing not to defend yourself is a bad look, and he resigned soon after the announcement of an investigation called for by dozens of his colleagues. The allegations came out 3 weeks ago, and he admitted at least making 'mistakes' in his PhD thesis. The loss of academic integrity is an existential threat to a university; the investigation should have played out, it might still even without him.
Absolutely. Standing up for your child is not encouraging violence, it's teaching them that their boundaries are important. Those are parents who care about their child's developing self-worth and there need to be more like them.
The battery is 1MWh, not 1MW. There are 1000 MW in a GW. Therefore, two barges could contain enough charge to run a gigawatt datacenter for one hour, so you'll need a barge to arrive every thirty minutes approximately.
They spent 38.5 billion on 13 billion in revenue last year. Even if you take out training costs, operational margins are negative at a cost of 14.8 billion as long as you include sales and marketing, which you absolutely should because they are clearly hiding expenses in that bucket. Nobody would spend 5.7 billion a year on marketing when they're already losing 20 billion.
Actually the law you described would suck ass as well.
Flaring here is a verb, not a noun, and it might be the wrong word to use but they probably mean it as the nose catching the air, the way a flaring skirt does.
For your information Odo, "I'm not sure, I hope so" is not a very reassuring response to the question "are those the only Bajorans you've killed?"
Odo has a kill count of one, or many, depending how you look at it: the ambassador's clone, Martok's clone, the sick changeling, and then Laas. He's a menace.
Evangelizing llms is pretty much all you do on here, you have spent an enormous amount of time and effort on them. If you're not even willing to accept that you have sunk costs relating to genai, your stating "I'm not insecure about this" is really not compelling.
They are really not that distinct, all the models cheat off each other just like they cheat copyrights.
The entire premise of chatbots is to have a simple natural-language interface instead of those scary GUIs and programming languages. The idea that maybe they didn't know enough about how to interact with ai, and that's why it failed to help them, is a little silly, and the more you explain how we're all using ai wrong, the sillier you look.
You've obviously sunk a lot of costs into genai, both in time and money, and that is making you defensive. Somebody that isn't impressed by Claude premium isn't going to do any of what you suggest, let alone get any more value out of it, and that's valid for them. You're not seriously interested in helping them professionally, you are just insecure.
You're right to be confused. We're replacing critical thinking skills with circular logic in all our classrooms, soon everyone will be confused.
Get yourself an adblocker to avoid these time sinks and scams. No valuable info has ever been communicated to me through an internet ad.
That's correct. Trying things is gay, if we can't have total world peace it's not worth it. It's the same reason I want to abolish firefighters.
Your replying to someone as if they are the embodiment of this forum makes you look like a contrarian asshole. You are in the forum, forumizing. Stop acting like you're better than anyone else here, or that this is a monolith you're speaking to instead of a collection of individuals with diverse opinions.
Criticizing a renowned doctor who refused to publicly give a medical diagnosis about someone who isn't a patient of theirs, and then making that judgement yourself based on youtube hot takes is not professional investigatory work, it's sloppy and ill-timed.
"It's not about x, it's about y" is always suspect, there can be multiple reasons for anything, and in this case the former is racism and the latter is a disease you looked into a little online. Saying "he actually did a lot of harm" is dismissive toward ongoing debates in the academic and black and black academic communities, it's saying 'none of that harm was real, but look at this other community I'm also not a part of being harmed'.
To be clear, you are probably right, I mean, it was always an incredible story, I also assumed it was at least slightly bullshit, but I just think investigating whether people are as autistic as they say they are is a bad path to go down. You yourself said that autistic people sometimes feel a need to exaggerate their symptoms in order to get recognition of their disability, and with Arday you might think we have a prime example of that, yet without evidence or credentials, you say he was actually neurotypical, giving us a prime example of why autistic people sometimes do this.
OK, maybe, but I hate that. It's fucking over the ability for journalists to benefit from scoops, from doing longer and deeper investigations. People who don't understand the value of asking questions are not exactly on a path of self reflection.
Where is it needed? Where do we need more covert racism and poor reasoning? Which part of the media ecosystem is running low on lies and clickbait?
If my friend sent me a long retelling of a wedding I missed and inside the message there was a weirdly placed hyperlink to a public post, by one of the bridesmaids or whatever, that had more info and pictures and a different interpretation of events, and then I find out my friend never went to the wedding, and actually never met the couple, I would be upset. Is all I'm saying. I don't see a need for it.
We all say protect journalism, it's dying... But, fuck these basement dwellers, if you want my respect as a journalist, do some journalism. I know Reason actually does have journalists, they might suck or not I'm not sure, but this here is not a piece of journalism.
It's very common, not just in forums, but I don't like when people share things with me without doing the bare minimum of clicking on the hyperlink to the original reporting, the primary source, the first version of history. It's not that difficult, they obscure it a little sometimes, it might even require an internet search or two. But it puts more attention and focus on the people actually investigating those in power instead of those that just sit on the sidelines and produce hate porn to steal all the air in the room.
False, it's able to fool c-suite execs and gullible rubes into thinking they can build an app. In reality, these vibe coding projects all fall apart. Zitron relies on Nik Suresh's arguments, which I agree with, that software development: shipping, running, and supporting software, is a hell of a lot more than just code.
The bad quality of the code and resulting app is really a secondary discussion to whether this can really count as software development. One of my favorite software development tools of the last decade is actually a Microsoft standard called LSP, which allows text editors to talk to compilers to get code suggestions and linting as you type. You used to have to use an 'integrated' text editor, or IDE, that usually only worked with one or a handful of languages. Now, everyone can use their editor of choice.
The ai craze, to me, is much lower in productivity gains than LSP for software development, it might be negative because you are handing off the one part of software development that ties all of its subdisciplines together. It's crazy how fast the industry standard went from 'clean code' and concerns about whitespace, furiously tracking issue lifetimes, to just throwing up their hands, actively telling people not to care. I hate both paradigms, to be clear, but at least they were trying to measuring things in the former.
Opinion piece, OpenAI's opinion, I guess, and presented in the form of an actual reporter interview. It's wild how much the former board member is able to stretch OpenAI's depiction of what happened into a false narrative of accelerating gains and apocalypsism, given she tried to get rid of Altman before the llm craze. That's dedication, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that even the 'good' board members were dumb.
Calling him exonerated is a stretch. Choosing not to defend yourself is a bad look, and he resigned soon after the announcement of an investigation called for by dozens of his colleagues. The allegations came out 3 weeks ago, and he admitted at least making 'mistakes' in his PhD thesis. The loss of academic integrity is an existential threat to a university; the investigation should have played out, it might still even without him.
Absolutely. Standing up for your child is not encouraging violence, it's teaching them that their boundaries are important. Those are parents who care about their child's developing self-worth and there need to be more like them.
*for one hour
OP not only fucked up conversion, but confused energy and power. Battery capacity is a measure of energy while grid usage is a measure of power.
The battery is 1MWh, not 1MW. There are 1000 MW in a GW. Therefore, two barges could contain enough charge to run a gigawatt datacenter for one hour, so you'll need a barge to arrive every thirty minutes approximately.
They spent 38.5 billion on 13 billion in revenue last year. Even if you take out training costs, operational margins are negative at a cost of 14.8 billion as long as you include sales and marketing, which you absolutely should because they are clearly hiding expenses in that bucket. Nobody would spend 5.7 billion a year on marketing when they're already losing 20 billion.