The way I see it, that’s just different wording for the same thing. More patient friendly, for sure.

Yeah. Roll the dice, hope for the best and all that. If power goes out, you could be looking at several days of troubleshooting, but it is unlikely to happen.

On the other hand, you could get that UPS, but that’s going to take time, and the server really needs those security patches today. Are you going to roll that dice instead and hope nobody tries to exploit a new vulnerability discovered this morning?

Either way, it’s pretty bad.

It’s highly context dependent.

In medicine, you face this question all the time. Will a surgery do more harm than good. Can I just leave that person suffering, or should I roll the dice with this surgery? It’s a proper dilemma to ponder. How about this medication that improves the patient’s quality of life in one area, but causes some side effects that are less horrifying than the underlying condition. Sounds like a win, but is it really?

In various technical contexts, you often find yourself comparing two bad options and pick the one that is “less bad”. Neither of them are evil, good, great or even acceptable. They’re both bad, and you have to pick one so that the machine can work for a while longer until you get the real spare parts and fix it properly. For example, you may end up running a water pump at lower speed for the time being. It wears down the bearing, moves less water, consumes too much energy etc, but it’s still better than shutting the pump down for two weeks.

Based on many comments in here, I get the feeling that this isn’t a logics/facts type of issue. Obviously, OP should start with that, but if/when it fails, it’s time to switch to more emotional tactics. This problem sounds a lot like some other cases where tangled emotions formed the foundation. There could be an emotional reason why these people are behaving the way they do. Find that, and you should be able to understand what you’re really dealing with. Problems like this just don’t tend to respond very well to truth, evidence, facts or logic. People are usually more or less emotional creatures, so that should be taken into account.

You know those business books that combine flimsy pop psychology and self help literature with personal development and business goals? Yeah, those books with 300 pages and only one good idea per 100 pages if you’re lucky. Rest of it is just fabricated stories, ideas copied from other books and regurgitation of ideas from the previous chapters to fluff up the page count. Yes, that category!

Well guess what? GPT can generate precisely that level of quality without any effort. In fact, it seems to gravitate towards that style unless you specifically work hard to steer it to aim higher. It has never been easier to become a business book author! Zero editing required. Just prompt and publish.

It feels like this is the one area where GPT truly excels.

Production engineers and battery scientists do. In their normal work, they only get to see like 0.1% improvements, so anything above 1% is like magic to them.

Yes. That’s true, but the major headlines don’t tell you about any of the 1-5% improvements that undoubtedly are happening all the time. The headlines focus on stuff that is either highly theoretical or still in the lab for the next few decades. If you want to read about what’s actually realistic and about to be implemented in production, those articles are probably in some monthly battery engineering journals.

Ooh, so that’s CEO speak for: “we’re broke, please give us more money”.

As long as it runs, it’s hackable. If it fails to compile, or crashes on start, nobody can hack it.

Oh, and the weekly battery articles too. “This new battery will charge in 10 minutes and last 2 weeks.”

And these people get paid absurd amounts of money too.

See also: COOL:gen

The whole concept of generating code is basically ancient by now. I heard about this stuff in the 90s, but now I found it that this thing has been around since 1985.

When the CEO of a tech company says that in x months this and that will happen, you know it’s just musk talk.

Yeah that pretty much sums it up. Sadly, it didn’t tell me how much coal was burned and how many starving orphan puppies it had to stomp on to produce the result.

In Copilot terminology, this is a “quick response” instead of the “think deeper” option. The latter actually stops to verify the initial answer before spitting it out.

Deep thinking gave me this: Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Maryland, North Dakota, Rhode Island, and South Dakota.

It took way longer, but at least the list looks better now. Somehow it missed Nevada, so it clearly didn’t think deep enough.

Can you share the prompt you used for making this happen? I think I could use it for a bunch of different things.

Cyberspace, hypertext, multimedia, dot com, Web 2.0, cloud computing, SAAS, mobile, big data, blockchain, IoT, VR and so many more. Sure, they can be used for some things, but doing that takes time, effort and money. On top of that, you need to know exactly when to use these things and when to choose something completely different.

I think that’s just the natural range of masculinity. Unfortunately, culture has evolved to focus on one extreme and ignore the other. If you happen to naturally gravitate towards “the wrong end of the spectrum”, you’ll run into some problems that shouldn’t even exist in the first place.

I check [email protected] from time to time.

That’s true. The general sentiment of AI will influence investor behavior and the availability of money. If LLMs fail spectacularly, it could make it harder to find investors open to the idea of using AI for various other things too. The past 10 years has seen a massive rise in new AI companies, so they will be able keep on selling tried and tested AI even when investor money dries up.