I'm not talking about what would be best for society, I'm talking about what would be best for Sony.

It does seem that way, since they probably would have expired otherwise, since they weren't able to execute. And neither can Intel. But since TSMC was able to advance process technology, we know it was possible, and therefore it would have been even better for AMD if they had been able to do that instead of divesting.

Widely? No. Divergent? Yes. Run the same query multiple times and you'll get different answers. The more input you give, the more subtle the differences are likely to be, but there's always a chance it will go completely off its nut and follow some line of "reasoning" that goes someplace utterly unrelated to what you asked for. This is less likely in special-purpose models, but never impossible.

But this is exactly where AI can actually be useful — so long as you don't depend on it to identify all of the design issues. It can review mountains of information and find things in it you might not have caught. You just can't assume that it will catch everything it "should" — that is, what it should be capable of catching is not necessarily what you are capable of catching.

Meanwhile, that periodic report has requirements, so you're going to have to ask it to write the report, then to review it to see if it met the requirements, then to review its own statements about whether it successfully met each requirement, because it won't do any of that sanity checking without being told to do so.

That's only even half of the stupid. There's no sense in a refrigerator even being able to be set to a temperature above about 70 F, as there's really no scenario in which you'd want to do that. You would just turn it off. Why on earth do they even allow these insane input values?

Is it just me or is it sick when Wikipedia doesn't even mention the singular thing people notice most about her, ostensibly in the name of political correctness? There's a way to write that section without violating their standards, but it isn't even there.

Cell was fabricated by IBM, so... No.

"because SSL makes it impossible to generate static content."

What SSL/TLS prevents is a caching proxy without doing any work. (Even that can be done, but it takes more steps.) You can deliver static content with encryption. If you are doing a lot of that, there are accelerators.

Have you seen this Supreme Court in action?

Are streets lights "growing dimmer"? It could be:

1. Color temperature changes
2. Your eyes being more used to high-K light and misunderstanding low-K light
3. You're getting old and your own eyes aren't as good in the dark as they used to be

Regardless, the solution isn't to blind other people on the road while you improve visibility for yourself. It's to drive slower with lights that are safe for everyone.

It really sounds like the college was stuck in a bad contract. At my university, almost every contract has a 30-day no-cause exit written into it, so if we're done, we can kill just about anything within 30 days.

This should also serve as further warning to everyone consider this or similar products. Know the contract. And know that they may adhere to the contract much stronger than you anticipate because you're not the only customer being served here.

Both of these approaches have been used. Some vehicles have both things. For example a Sprinter T1N always has glow plugs, but a block heater is an option, but an Espar heater is actually more common! And when equipped, it comes with a timer, not just a knob controller like you would get with the cheapest install kit.

More hardcoded passwords and the like in the renewal processes where people have been doing them manually and don't know how to automate them correctly. These people should be outsourcing this...

You can't. You won't. You will outsource all of that to your web provider. Mine handles renewing my cert for me automatically. I could provide my own, but I don't have to. Instead, they handle getting it... from Let's Encrypt. I will not even notice this change, because they will continue to do so.

I have done my own self-signed certs and whatnot, I have installed certs from Verisign professionally yada yada, but there's no reason for me to do anything other than this for my vanity site. But there's really no good reason for most companies which can't afford to have an IT staff to do anything else either. They are not dependent on their website to do business.

I see them ditching their consumer line, since it's too hard to differentiate there now, and focusing on pro equipment. Their camera line is very successful.

It can't, though, and for two reasons. One, a person is required to check off on the data. Two, LLMs don't faithfully represent data. They ingest it as tokens and then what they crap out is influenced by random numbers produced internally as part of the token selection process. That means a person cannot certify that the data was faithfully reproduced without checking literally every value, because that's simply not how LLMs work.

You can potentially address this with a hybrid approach, where the LLM uses a tool to collect and manipulate the data, but this is shifting the problem to whether the LLM used the tool correctly. It might be more obvious when it doesn't, though, so it might still be a win.

What LLMs seem best at when it comes to text processing, and they are still not infallible, is summarization. But you can't trust its negatives, so it's only useful for identifying other possible positives. That's not worthless, it can help you catch things, but you can't trust it to do the parts you'd most want it to do.