Really it’s very on-brand for Trump. He’s always looking for the worst person to do every job.

IMHO it’s really all about you being worried about how others react. Speaking as a 50 year old guy, I would walk around naked if it was normal in society. Put the bikini on and stand in front of a mirror. Make sure you’re confident that it looks normal (no tags still showing, nothing that is too revealing or pinching in the wrong spot or whatever… then put it on and go out in public and don’t think about it. It’ll be fine and nobody will think twice about it other than maybe saying “damn she’s keeping herself in shape!”

It’ll be fine. Don’t let others get in your head so much that it determines what you’re going to do or wear.

What? Really? Chiang Kai-shek just ran his army over to some other random country and took it over? That can’t be right…

The thing is… AI is making me smarter! I use AI as a learning tool. The absolute best thing about AI is the ability to follow up questions with additional questions and get a better understanding of a subject. I use it to ask about technical topics and flush out a better understanding that I ever got from just a text book. I have seem some instances of hallucinating in the past, but with the current generation of AI I’ve had very good results and consider it an excellent tool for learning.

For reference I’m an engineer with over 25 years of experience and I am considered an expert in my field.

24 hours he said. He could end the war in 24 hours. All he has to do is talk tough and Putin would bow to his flabby pasty white biceps! Anyone who doesn’t recognize this as 100% pure bullshit should pull their head out of Trump’s fat ass and have their it examined.

I don’t think this is a good counter argument since this was more allies getting together to discuss and negotiate plans. Zelensky and Putin would be more like the Emperor of Japan meeting with FDR to discuss a peace treaty for Japan. Or Hitler and Churchill getting together.

Leaders usually wait until an agreement is in place before putting their reputations on the line, as there’s always resistance from hardline “fight to the end” factions. It’s smarter to confront that opposition only when the benefits of a deal are assured.

Peace talks usually don’t include the real leaders. This really seems to be a non story.

Negotiations are done by lower level diplomats and the agreement is signed off by the leaders. That’s diplomacy 101. Name one major 20th century diplomatic deal that was negotiated by the leaders in person. I know we all hate Putin and Russia here, but let’s not be stupid in our criticism.

I bet this is just India making a statement to Pakistan. Turn off the water for a few days then turn it back on.

As people pointed out, if they keep it closed very long it will overflow so India doesn’t want that. Also blowing up the dam is one hell of a stupid suggestion. Can you imagine how bad that would be to the people downstream? And you know who is down? Pakistan. That would be so dumb.

This is a political point, and they can’t possibly be cutting off water for any real length of time.

This is more like a trade-war crime. If this is a war crime then the us has been committing an endless war crime by sucking sooooo much of the Colorado River before it goes into Mexico.

If this is a war crime then Ukraine committed one when they shut off water to Crimea.

(This is not a war crime)

I’m kind of glad. I want the Supreme Court to realize sooner rather than later that Trump won’t listen to them and that they’re not his friend, just useful patsies.

I’m sorry for all the people that are caught up in Trump’s bullshit. That guy is fucking evil.

I’m not against Jews, I’m against Israel. It appears that the lesson they learned from the Nazis is how to commit atrocities.

Three microchips at once that’s awesome!

Human vision is great, human attention is not and neither is their reaction time. Computers are 100x better at both of those. If you throw lidar into the mix, then a car’s vision is now much better than a humans.

IMHO self driving cars have to be statistically 10x better than humans to be widely implemented. If it passes that threshold them I’m fine with them.

I’m assuming it’s a cost because it makes sense to me. His goal was to build full-self-driving (FSD) into ever car and sell the service as a subscription.

If you add another $500 in components then that’s a lot of cost (probably a lot cheaper today but this was 10 years ago). Cameras are cheap and can be spread around the car with additional non-FSD benefits where as lidar has much fewer uses when the cost is not covered. I think he used his “first-principles” argument as a justification to the engineers as another way for him to say “I don’t want to pay for lidar, make it work with the cheap cameras.”

Why else would management take off the table an obviously extremely useful safety tool?

He didn’t think they were better. He thought Tesla could get away without the more expensive lidar. Basically “humans can drive with just vision, that should be enough for an autonomous vehicle also.” Basically he did it because lidar is more expensive.

I think this all has to do with how you are going to compare and pick a winner in intelligence. the traditional way is usually with questions which llms tend to do quite well at. they have the tendency to hallucinate, but the amount they hallucinate is less than the amount they don’t know in my experience.

The issue is really all about how you measure intelligence. Is it a word problem? A knowledge problem? A logic problem?.. And then the issue is, can the average person get your question correct? A big part of my statement here is at the average person is not very capable of answering those types of questions.

In this day and age of alternate facts and vaccine denial, science denial, and other ways that your average person may try to be intentionally stupid… I put my money on an llm winning the intelligence competition versus the average person. In most cases I think the llm would beat me in 90% of the topics.

So, the question to you, is how do you create this competition? What are the questions you’re going to ask that the average person’s going to get right and the llm will get wrong?

I asked gemini and ChatGPT (the free one) and they both got it right. How many people do you think would get that right if you didn’t write it down in front of them? If Copilot gets it wrong, as per eletes’ post, then the AI success rate is 66%. Ask your average person walking down the street and I don’t think you would do any better. Plus there are a million questions that the LLMs would vastly out perform your average human.

Then asking it a logic question. What question are you asking that the llms are getting wrong and your average person is getting right? How are you proving intelligence here?

You say this like this is wrong.

Think of a question that you would ask an average person and then think of what the LLM would respond with. The vast majority of the time the llm would be more correct than most people.

Honestly all the fails with the kid dummy were a way bigger deal than the wall test. The kid ones will happen a hundred times more than the wall scenario.

Some sort of radar or lidar should 100% be required on autonomous cars.