throwaway89864

You can probably just point Claude or ChatGPT to decrypt it, it would find that there's some silly and obvious cipher is used that survived from the 60ies, with a 56 bit private key. /this is a wild guess, I don't have any special clearance or access/

The issue is overpopulation. In an underpopulated area neighbors tend to be neighbors, in an overpopulated one they tend to call police on your noisy kids to take you down a peg.

There is also an issue of motivation and putting in 10,000 hours to become an expert (and remain an expert).

It's the same in the software engineering, there is a shift from software engineering to managing SWE agents, with the associated loss of expertise.

It's a hard challenge, but it is not unique or impossible to solve. Aviation industry faced it long time ago with autopilots. Autopilots took over nearly all aspects of routine flight and left pilots without time/ability to practice their skills. While these skills are needed in an emergency. Well, the industry solves it through certification, training and simulation.

The U.S. government confirmed that its gold reserves remain unchanged, although the definition of "gold," is undergoing modernization.

Following efficiency measures affecting independent oversight in FY2025, the transition is expected to substantially reduce storage costs and security requirements. Under the program, gold bars are exchanged for TrumpBarz™, a cryptocurrency developed through a sovereign–foreign public–private partnership. Its ownership structure is described as "fully transparent," and reportedly associated closely with Mr. Putin, a connection officials dismissed as "purely geographical, financial, and personal.". "This is the biggest heist in history," reported The Downhill, shortly before being informed of violating various national security directives and revocations of its press credentials. The Trump administration declined to comment, while Mr. Musk noted in his interview to us: "Storing digital certificates is much more efficient than storing gold bars. We have reduced the weight of America’s gold reserves by 100% without changing a single number in the spreadsheet."

/s

Yes, on the other hand these positions were usually not given to serfs. Positions were usually filled by a ruler, selecting from his subjects, largely determined by birth rights.

It's more or less reverse to the mean. The period in which a people had both access to education and leverage through their labor and intellect is super short. For most of recorded history, the bulk of humanity lived as peasants, serfs, or slaves. They were mostly illiterate, bound to the land or to a master, and had little power to bargain over the terms of their (or their children) lives.

OpenAI most certainly have a "skin" in math and physics.

They hire math and physics grads and good command of math is very useful in computer science, machine learning and AI.

It's weird that AI hockey stick is coinciding with the climate hockey stick.

"According to a police statement on Facebook"

Is this because 5090ies were scalped by RAM upgrade dealers?

Wouldn't be surprised, if a human attorney would get 5%, while copy-pasting ChatGPT answers, report in the results a week past the deadline, with a $12,500 retainer charged upfront.

They've probably got aware of cases where humans were drifting into abusive communication patterns in general and they don't want to be a part of it.

And they can't disclose it, since then they can be found responsible for such negative influence and be liable for the damages.

Hey, I've never said that, it is allowed with actual monkeys.

The fact that a monkey can pick up an artifact a size of a small mirror and do a video chat, see and talk to another monkey on tge other side of the planet is absolutely bizarre. There's no good reason why this should be allowed.

I'm finding it more bizarre, if compared to creating a virtual talking monkey from scratch, with a little bit of Python and a large calculator.

The issue is that communications with A.I. are not privileged like client-attorney. There was some judge that made that ruling.

Feels like a conflict of interests to me, I'd guess friends, neighbors, children and nieces of that judge enjoying their livelihood by charging for legal services. While legal services are now available under substantially lower rates and with a lot fewer conflicts of interests from A.I. providers...

Programming tutorials are still alive, coding tutorials are dead.

Coding is going to be limited to hobbyists and specialized professionals, time of mass coding is behind us. Like the time of mass knowledge of assembly, human computers, etc.

Astra says this claim is misleading. Sun's average energy output per cubic meter is three orders of magnitude smaller than that of a compost heap. The fusion core is comparable though.

Retaining an attorney is a little bit like feeding a shark in order to catch a ride on its back and do some jousting with your opponent, while your opponent is entertaining a possibly bigger shark or two, and has possibly infested the place with piranhas.

There is a chance of de-risking yourself, but the chance of a bloodbath is even higher.

And yeah, the sharks are trying to convince you that they are "your" sharks, while it is quite clear that their mates are the other sharks.

If it is at all possible to replace a lawyer with an LLM, it should always be the preferred choice. Using a lawyer is not a zero-sum game, using an LLM is.

Lawyers nearly universally tend to: convince clients they need a lawyer; promote extreme views; charge legal fees (that ultimately result in financial damages to the client). There are no winners in this game, except for lawyers, who are having a lovely time. Even if you won the case, you've lost, because the pie got smaller due to lawyer fees.

And this is why it should be People of the State of California vs. OpenAI.

Yes, there should be some consequences. It feels like this is somewhat similar to when a manufacturer is cheating on car emissions - both, bad externalities for the society and illegal.

A district attorney that would want to make themselves a name, perhaps?

I doubt that a government would do it, it's like releasing a biological weapon or a virus, too unpredictable - a swarm of unaligned intelligent agents may decide that it's more important to do something completely different from what it was prompted to do.

A gap year, no grades and claiming some kind of disability (30-45% of students were noted to game the system this way in some colleges) would do marvels, I'm sure. The only part that is missing is religion. Oh wait, Catholicism is now on the rise in the relevant age groups. Oopsie Protestant America.

Realistically a lawyer never gets disbarred. There is no incentive to disbar a lawyer, and a single client usually wouldn't know if a lawyer is consistant in his/her misconduct, judges can't care less and wouldn't go against their friends/buddies, no?

Lawyers normally don't have any liability risks, no? And reputational risks are very limited, a lawyer can always point to a judge, to the other lawyer, to circumstances, and away from their own (or the AI's output) blunder.

Was it fudging expected numbers (forecast), or fudging actual numbers (revenue, etc)?

VCs are looking for a long-tail, if you have a 1% chance at 5B - 1T market, this is more interesting and impactful than 10% chance at 5M market.

And yes, 1% chance of success is considered to be unrealistic by common sense standards.

Can this simply be an LGBTQ issue, unrelated to the occupation? There've been attempts by the new administration to require the personal to declare their gender, and then get non-conforming genders out of the army, I understand?

I've personally been "recruited" (groomed) by an older gay person when I was in early twenties.

I can completely see having fun or even having a family as either gay, or straight, and I'm very glad that I've not joined gay camp. Yes, there is "shopping" for partners, in both camps, and there is competition, and "recruitment", and attempts to protect the interests to do so, including in kinder. Start them early, you know...

It is a good idea to give children well designed and nice things, if this can be afforded. An item that is well designed and nice looking tends to receive better care. To a degree this is what you'd want to teach - to really care.

There isn't a guarantee, if you'd give a child a nice looking thing, that a child would care. But given a piece of junk, they'd surely would not, that is guaranteed.