19,843 karma · joined June 18, 2015
You can see it right now with AI barreling forward. If we don’t develop it, someone else will, so we will ensuring it happens.
Of course we can never prove or disprove their claim of “someone else will” because they went ahead and did it.
There had always been abolitionists who were against slavery simply because they thought it was immoral, not because they thought slaves weren’t needed anymore.
Today’s kids are tomorrows doctors, engineers, tradesmen, drivers, etc.
I would guess that in most cases, someone is flying with an infant because they are going somewhere important and traveling with their infant was the best option available to them.
Traveling by air (or at all) with an infant is not fun and I can’t imagine that ever being anyone’s first choice.
So when you see frazzled parents at the airport with their young children, assume the best and be kind.
The only reason they’re selling it is because people are buying it.
It’s an American problem.
It’s be an interesting experiment to put a temperature probe in something like a block of cheese, let it cool to the ambient fridge temperature, then open the fridge door for a few minutes and see if the temperature of the cheese even measurably changes over the next few hours or whatever amount of time.
Even when I do write code, I spend more time thinking about the code than actually writing so losing time to using my mouse doesn’t matter.
Or I could use a desktop on expend my limited mental energy on things more relevant to me. It’s far easier for me to remember things in a visual or spatial manner.
That was the point. It was always intentional that it was effectively impossible to comply with. You can’t know if you’re violating it, but if you do, you’ll be in deep shit.
However it can makes sense if the surrounding context supports the idea of only one nice evening.
Grammar rules are generally about the surrounding context which allow us to leave out superfluous or repeated information and still be understood. Things sound strange when that missing information can’t be deduced from context.
Because you are referring to a specific one of each, even if a listener doesn’t necessarily know which specific one, they know that you know.
In the case of your example the listener assumes you mean whichever specific dentist you are currently seeing. That fact that you may choose one randomly each time is an exception.
In the case where someone uses AI to write the paper and then deeply familiarizes themself with it, it may go undetected, but then it’s also presumably less of an issue since they have actually read it carefully and closely. If it’s still bad or wrong after that, then it’s not that different from a human writing a bad or wrong paper on their own and should be treated similarly.