I love this way of putting it. "I subscribed to the dev team."

Rand Paul isn't particularly conservative, like most Republicans. He's for small government except when he's not. But to be fair to him, he's for slightly smaller government than most of his colleagues, and he does actually vote that way. I think he's wrong about most things, but he's MOSTLY honest and up front about what he thinks.

But yeah, that's a pretty dismal headcount for a party that consistently runs on fiscal responsibility. But again, to be fair, they also consistently fail at it.

Well, that's not true. Trivially, AI includes randomization, which is something beyond pattern matching.

Anyways, give us all an objective definition of what intelligence actually is, and what precludes machines from doing whatever that is, and let's go from there.

Somebody downmodded you for that, but I can't tell if you are in fact arguing they are self-aware, or arguing that cogito ero sum doesn't really prove anything so everything is baseless...

Hurricanes often hit Florida, so blaming hurricane damage on "climate change" is clearly a gross oversimplification. It probably made the hurricanes worse, but it's not a binary switch. Similarly for a lot of those things. And there are probably some places where climate changes improved things. (A lot fewer, I'll admit.)

This piece strikes me an as oversimplification, probably for political reasons. Yes, a lot of disasters were made worse by climate change. I suspect that pine beetles have continued to spread north, as winter die-offs are curtailed. Etc. But most of the changes are incremental. And much of that "investment" needed to be done anyway.

Steam has normalised DRM to the point where fans will defend it or try to breeze past the point. It's not just a happy friendly library, it comes with restrictions. The original animated GIF for Steam, for those with long memories, was not a kind one.

I don't think the problem is with the Constitution. Any Constitution is just a piece of paper, unless people collectively honor it. You could say it makes the Executive too strong, but this has happened gradually as we allowed it, or asked for it, since Congress has become crippled with partisan politics. For example the Constitution gives the power to set tariffs to Congress, not the President. Yet look where we are now.

How about the US, period?

You mention you have the N version? That's the one with simulated engine noise and gear movements - how are you finding it? Fun? Or are you finding you're not using those bits?

Curious - I like the idea of the N, it's not a car for me but I can very easily see its appeal as a useful vehicle that still adds a bit of a fun factor.

I don't know why - 'an hour for my car to charge' hasn't been a thing for years. I owned a first gen (nose-cone) Model S and could spend 45 minutes getting to 80% of a 202 range if I ran it to the bottom. But that car came out eleven years ago. No car today charges like that - I have a Y right now and 10-15 minute stops if any are the norm, and that's on a much bigger range to start with (330 miles I think - says everything that I can't remember because it's just not an issue I hit).

Get through a day's driving on a single charge? Easily. Two days for most. Three days for some. Charge it while I sleep? Of course, I do that every day and have done for the seven or eight years I've been driving an EV now.

So what you're saying is it's back to the 50s then?

The original computers were human.

I think it's kind of delicious to see chess used as a benchmark of intelligence again. Of course the chatbot could be augmented with a chess engine that it knows how to invoke to easily beat any human. But using an LLM as a chess engine itself is a nice challenge. Maybe there's a way to do it, or maybe AI as we know it needs more visualization capability. Or maybe if the AI can write a good chess engine given the rules.

In any case a single guy trying to prove a negative by failing to do something (set up an LLM to play chess) is not very convincing.

"What did Paul Volker do to stop inflation? To subdue double-digit inflation, Chairman Volcker announced, in October 1979, a dramatic break in the way that monetary policy would operate. In practice, the new approach to monetary policy involved high interest rates (tight money) to slow the economy and fight inflation." Carter basically sacrifices political career by allowing this to happen. Then Reagan opened the floodgates of debt and made everybody feel good.

This isn't cheating. If a fucking journal is garbage enough to let AI review papers, then the whole thing is suspect and this is actually the best thing to happen.

The slop infects everything. Neither journals that allow AI reviews nor those papers should exist at all. One scammer was trying to play another and I don't feel bad for any of them.