A different approach to the not liking water, get a good filter. I used breta filters for years but a few years back installed an under sink reverse osmosis filter because the water here is so hard that it just tastes bad whether left hard or softened. I knew water could be better because I grew up with decent water and liked it even back when I preferred pop or juice.

I wonder if anyone who claims to dislike water has only ever had subpar water. Note that I include a bunch of bottled waters in that, as I vastly prefer my RO tap water to any store bought bottled water, though some were on par with breta filtered water, though I’ve always hated the waste involved in buying bottled water (other than those big ones you can refill and stick in a water cooler, which can also be RO water if you have a good water place to get it from).

If you do go for RO, make sure the system you get has an extra stage that adds some minerals back into the water. The RO on its own actually leaves the water too pure to be safe to drink regularly, as it causes osmosis to pull nutrients out of your cells (or something like that). I’d also only suggest it in an area where water is plentiful, as it does use more water than what you get from the filter, though adding a passive pump can improve efficiency.

You might be able to go into the settings and set it to use your default browser instead of using their own.

Yeah, I wonder how much of this is actual learning vs just gaming the school’s systems. And how much of it was just getting an LLM to fake it even more.

I would say that I’m not satisfied with how our species handles belief, trust, and faith. It comes down to how confidently someone talks to them, when someone expressing uncertainty to me indicates more honesty rather than the other way around.

Though since I have to at least agree that it’s hard to define exactly how it should change, I can adjust to wishing more people were willing to think critically about things.

Susceptibility to propaganda.

Corruption. Soviet corruption was taking funds intended to buy x of y, priced at the cost of materials + labour + logistics for making x of y and delivering it to where it needs to be, but instead only buying (x - z) of y and pocketing the difference, but writing down that x were delivered, expecting that they’d just sit in storage anyways and by the time anyone figures it out, time, apathy, and incompetence will help avoid consequences.

Western corruption is starting a company to produce y and when a government orders x of them, x are delivered but are priced at the highest price the company can negotiate, possibly while the other side of the negotiation is feeding them info for a tiny portion of the money saved (or more likely less direct kickbacks, like the promise of a job offer after they finish their government position). All x of y get delivered but the price is significantly higher than what it costs to produce them.

Also R&D is priced in because it’s all done for the sake of making profit and must be recovered through the unit sales.

How many warehouse fires are there in the average week? Statistics could be used to determine the odds of this being a nornal week or something unusual.

Though even if it is unusual, it could just as easily be a false flag intended to blame high prices on anything other than the situation in Iran.

Or maybe information could be gleamed from those gambling sites. Were there any bets about warehouse fires and did any event have sudden big bets for a new fire before it started?

I’m surprised english is the 3rd highest natively spoken language.

I’ll cross that bridge when I get there. YouTube is already near the bottom of my list for source of information and I already have more sources of entertainment than I have time, so if they manage to win their war on ad blockers, I have no problem never visiting the site again.

And you can decide the thing you want isn’t worth the cost.

It might be saving some portion of young women from ending up in a toxic relationship with someone with the emotional intelligence of a noodle.

Though imagine the rage of these guys realized how many of them are “dating” the same model. Other guys probably even figured out how to prompt them better.

I meant like births, as in even if you can enumerate every single individual, statistics can apply to future members that don’t yet exist.

And yeah, it’s been a while and I remembered that the proof didn’t depend on the population size but forgot that it assumed a large population size in the first place. I was wrong.

Games rely on more than just the OS API and even variation between Linux flavours or installed libraries on the same flavours can make compatibility difficult. My success rate at running games with a Linux native version is maybe 50% before I fall back to proton and the windows version. The consistency helps, though kudos to the developers who put in the effort to get their games working on Linux in general rather than just their particular systems.

The gpu library is a big one. There’s OpenGL, DirectX, and Vulkan (which is the successor to OpenGL) that I know of. Linux and windows support all three, in some form or manner, but afaik mac only supports OpenGL, which really holds back game development, especially with DX being the most popularly targeted one.

Though my info might be a bit dated because I dgaf about macs generally, just wanted to point out that the shared roots between mac and Linux don’t necessarily mean targeting one would make targeting the other easier in a meaningful way.

Maybe one day they’ll sell a dongle to play games (which is really just a live boot linux install).

Then any statistics you measure on that population might be fully accurate for those 100 but might be less able to predict what the next 100 will look like.

You can still measure stats with smaller groups, it just means the confidence interval is smaller. With 300, there’s a 95% chance your test results are close to reality. With 100 it might be more like 66%.

Lmao, so the LLM framework falls back to similar shit to what ALICE used?

So far so good, though we’ll see how my own time smoking and vaping catches up to me in the end.

And then you hear shit like living in a city is as bad for your lungs as smoking from all the car exhaust and figure “well at least I’m back down to just smoking risk instead of 2x smoking risk”. I am (hopefully) relatively healthier than I was when I did smoke, though unfortunately older.

Hope your health reflects your healthy choices well and that you haven’t gotten old in the meantime while seeing how it goes. :)

Lol I assumed OP meant mock as in “You want to go to tiktok? What a horrible site. You have bad taste.”

Yeah, and the flavours helped because it wasn’t as satisfying as cigarettes but you could have fun flavours to at least make it enjoyable and interesting enough to not just want a cigarette instead (or in addition).

Relatively safe != safe, it just means more safe than the thing being compared to. It’s likely still a big improvement over smoking.

My point isn’t AI is good or bad, but that the difference is how much it gets leaned on.

In this case, it’s how AI is (assumed to be) used at MS vs how it was used in the OP.

MS appears to be heavily leaning on generative AI producing code. In my own experience, that is pretty good these days at responding to a prompt with a series of actions that achieves the desire of the prompt, but is bad at creating an overall cohesion between prompts. It’s like it’s pretty good at making lego blocks but if you try putting it all together, it looks like you built something from 50 different sets, plus the connections between the blocks are flawed enough that it’s liable to collapse the more you put it together.

In the OP, AI is being used to submit bug reports. This one can be thought of as using an AI to write a book report instead of using an AI to write the book in the first place. If the AI writes a shitty report, it has zero effect on the book itself. But the AI might just include a list of all the typos in its report, which is useful for correcting the errors in the book.

Also, game studios forgetting to replace placeholders is yet another issue more on the process itself, though it can also show a lack of attention to detail and maybe indicate that an AI was handling more of the process. A decent system would flag all assets for whether they are placeholders or final and then include a review of all flags before publishing to catch something like this.

So this isn’t a general defense of using AI, I’m just saying that it’s possible to use it without everything it touches turning to slop, but that it often isn’t used like that, resulting in slop.

And it’ll be easy to fall into the slop trap, what with how it’s always making leaps and bounds inprovements that help with instances of it fucking up but don’t resolve the fundamental issues that will probably mean LLMs will always produce some sort of slop (because everything boils down to some sort of word association, just with a massive set of conditional probabilities encoded into it that gives it the illusion of understanding).