

Oh, wait
Hannah Monta!
Oh, wait
Hannah Monta!
Hannah Montana!
Well, she didn’t do the scene.
Especially, perhaps, if these are things that your partner does, and you’re looking for things that remind you of your partner when you’re looking for video game characters to romanticize 😎
Well, incidentally, porn bots. And he doesn’t want to lose them, too!
What drawbacks?
deleted by creator
“Convoy Lead, this is Echo Three. Visual on Tango Ice at grid two-four-niner by one-seven-five. Heading east on Maple Avenue. Initiating pursuit. How copy, over?”
Your Gemini is way funnier in my opinion. I think he actually might have set up a trap for himself by asking it to produce what the LLM would consider a typical or average reply. Whereas by asking it to just make a short, funny comment, you’re actually getting results that feel more natural.
For Gemini, only the first and last one read weird to me. But I think I would just assume that I’m missing some context to get the jokes, or something.
Whereas the actual replies from the OP actually reek of standard LLM drivel. The way it is trying so hard to sound casual and cool, but coming across as super awkward is just classic GPT.
At the same time, I feel like we shouldn’t let that happen because imagine if he actually succeeds? And then we just have immortal crackhead Lex Luthor with a hallucinating ChatGPT whispering further delusions directly into his brain. That can’t be good for any of us.
deleted by creator
How would it feel to just uninstall?
You should note that this was a Gmail feature that is now made available by a bunch of email providers, but you might wanna check that you do indeed get your emails delivered to plus addresses before you rush out to change your contact info everywhere. Some providers have lacking support and sometimes emails may fail to send to plus addresses even if your side does support it. Using a catchall will always work because you know, that’s just how email works.
It is definitely the exact opposite of this. Even though I understand why you would think this.
The thing with systems like these is they are mission critical, which is usually defined as failure = loss of life or significant monetary loss (like, tens of millions of dollars).
Mission critical software is not unit tested at all. It is proven. What you do is you take the code line by line, and you prove what each line does, how it does it, and you document each possible outcome.
Mission critical software is ridiculously expensive to develop for this exact reason. And upgrading to deploy on different systems means you’ll be running things in a new environment, which introduces a ton of unknown factors. What happens, on a line by line basis, when you run this code on a faster processor? Does this chip process the commands in a slightly different order because they use a slightly different algorithm? You don’t know until you take the new hardware, the new software, and the code, then go through the lengthy process of proving it again, until you can document that you’ve proven that this will not result in any unusual train behavior.
I’ve thought of it many times and it hasn’t helped me for shit
I haven’t been paying attention to Hyundai, what did they do?
Oh yeah no that was a typo, that budget is for Alan Wake 2 - its on the Alan Wake 2 wikipedia page, sourcing a Finnish newspaper at the time of writing this comment.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Wake_2
Almost certainly will, unless it is exclusively used in rough terrain where it will encounter a lot of rolling resistance, inertia or obstacles that are hard for wheels to overcome by themselves.