I’ve never found Bing chat to match up with the free ChatGPT. It often just refuses to answer my question while ChatGPT will at least take a guess and give me something to work with.

They do not have sales data, so they use two different proxies: number of reviews, and number of active players.

I don’t see mention of how they get the number of active players. I’m assuming it’s through stats in Steam or something similar. If that’s the case, then their assumption of this number being biased towards being larger than the true number would be wrong. If you choose to both pirate and buy the game, chances are good that you’ll be playing the pirated version, and therefore would not get counted towards active players.

Same. I keep thinking back to my time TAing for an intro programming course and getting students who just add random braces until their code compiles. That’s me right now with Rust pointers.

Much faster to skim the contents of an article than a video.

Probably not. But have you considered one male authority figure and a cohort of female underlings?

Well, if that’s how it worked before, they must’ve changed it. I installed it last night without paying and it never blocked me.

Are you talking about DeArrow? The website gives you the option to pay or just download without paying.

As far as I know, that has only failed when we allow corporations to take our money and resources without our input. That’s exactly what this proposal is meant to address.

My area supposedly does the same thing. I’ve always wondered how they figure out who the trash belongs to.

Where’s the problem? If they use more environmentally friendly packaging, then they get more profits. There’s no incentive to use anything else.

I have no qualms about AI being used in products. But when you have to tell me that something is “powered by AI” as if that’s your main selling point, then you do not have a good product. Tell me what it does, not how it does it.

Oh, so you mean local vs external, not browser-based vs other local solutions.

What makes the built-in database easier to attack than a separate one?

If no one can make sense of the change, then you reject it. Makes no difference if it was generated with an LLM or copy-pasted from Stackoverflow.

Reminds me of this story of the wifi that only worked when it rained

https://predr.ag/blog/wifi-only-works-when-its-raining/

I’d be surprised if being born with a specific face configuration isn’t protected in the same way that race and gender are.

Treat people well, and people will like you.

Somehow, we manage to accept organ transplants despite it hurting one healthy person a little to help an unhealthy person a lot. What’s stopping us from treating birth control the same way?

But then that wouldn’t be for health reasons, right?

It is made by scientists. And we don’t know how to make the model determine whether or not it knows something. So far, we only have tools that tell us that something probably wasn’t in the training set (e.g. using variance across models in a mixture of experts setup), but that doesn’t tell us anything about how correct it is.