Yeah, I assume the now-former employee acted with full expectation of losing her job over this. She succeeded at bringing attention to something many people (myself included) hadn’t heard about before, so she at least accomplished that much.
Well, I’m doing my part against them by refusing to click on any bait headlines, but I fear it’s a lost cause anyway.
It may not rise to the level of proof, but it is a memorable and easily understood demonstration of something already proven by car safety researchers, as mentioned in the article.
Why shouldn’t they precut the wall into cartoony shapes? It adds entertainment and doesn’t compromise the demonstration.
Well of course I am. Lots of sensible folks are posting negative things about ICE online. ICE are a bunch of assholes.
That’s my read on it too. Trying to have it both ways, and not exactly succeeding at it.
It’s my understanding that the executive does not have the authority to unilaterally change official geographic names. As of my writing this, the name “change” has NOT been adopted by the United States government. Congress granted that authority to the US Board of Geographic Names in 1890. Unless accepted by the US BoGN, it changes nothing. I suppose Congress could rename it if they passed a bill that the president signed into law overriding that authority for that specific case, but until they did so, it’s not official.
Here is the link to the US Geographic Names Information system page showing the current official name of the Gulf of Mexico: https://edits.nationalmap.gov/apps/gaz-domestic/public/search/names/558730. Note the list of accepted variant names, which still doesn’t include “Gulf of America”.
Google are saying here that they will only change it on maps if it’s made official by the US Government, which has not happened yet. That’s why they haven’t made any change yet, and won’t unless Trump gets the US BoGN to do his bidding.
Edit: well that didn’t take long. They already made made the change.
The question is are they really that incompetent, or are they really that malicious? Add in mislabeling the report as fraud instead of infringement, I lean towards them being malicious, but I guess that could also be gross incompetence. Either way, Brandshield looks terrible.
That looks interesting. When I get through my current Factorio relapse, I’ll have to give it a try.
Professors don’t always teach in their actual area of expertise. I had a German language professor whose PhD was in Philosophy and activity published in that field, in English, German and French journals. It does seem like an odd combination, but probably not a lot of students signing up for a class in usability of buttons, even from the fields you would expect to study them .
Yes, hallucination is the now standard term for this, but it’s a complete misnomer. A hallucination is when something that does not actually exist is perceived as if it were real. LLMs do not perceive, and therefor can’t hallucinate. I know, the word is stuck now and fighting against it is like trying to bail out the tide, but it really annoys me and I refuse to use it. The phenomenon would better be described as a confabulation.
The issue with having mandatory useless comments is that any actually useful comments get lost in the noise.
As a Millennial, I’m now too old to tell the difference.
I work at a small computer shop and I love putting all those RGB lights in for people. Especially when I can do a full aRGB setup with a SignalRGB layout so patterns can move across the whole machine. For my own computer the only lights are the tiny power and hard drive activity lights, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. RGB lights belong only in other people’s computers.
Thanks, that is a better word there.
I can see the argument that it has a sort of world model, but one that is purely word relationships is a very shallow sort of model. When I am asked what happens when a glass is dropped onto concrete, I don’t just think about what I’ve heard about those words and come up with a correlation, I can also think about my experiences with those materials and with falling things and reach a conclusion about how they will interact. That’s the kind of world model it’s missing. Material properties and interactions are well enough written about that it ~~simulates ~~ emulates doing this, but if you add a few details it can really throw it off. I asked Bing Copilot “What happens if you drop a glass of water on concrete?” and it went into excruciating detail about how the water will splash, mentions how it can absorb into it or affect uncured concrete, and now completely fails to notice that the glass itself will strike the concrete, instead describing the chemistry of how using “glass (such as from the glass of water)” as aggregate could affect the curing process. Having a purely statistical/linguistic world model leaves some pretty big holes in its “reasoning” process.
The board’s job is to hire the CEO and demand good value for shareholders. The CEO’s job is to make the big decisions to achieve that goal quickly and then usually leave before their short term thinking falls apart. The manager’s job is to enforce whatever decisions the CEO makes, even if it is stupid or cruel. And the employee’s job is to suffer so that each layer above can look good to the layer above them.
Not to say there’s no good people in the system. My manager for most of my time there was actually a good manager who felt that his primary job was to deflect away the shit that rolled down from above so we could focus on our work, but then he got laid off along with half my coworkers.
I do miss writing software, but I really don’t miss working in the corporate world.
I assume the term is referring to the person knowing only the vibes of the program they want to code rather than comprehending the details of what it needs to do.