Yes, we know. Now show us all of her political work that she’s done outside of presidential election cycles.

Let them fight.

Ah yes. The unintended consequences of mandated code coverage without reviewing the tests. If you can mock the shit out of the test conditions to always give you exactly the answer you want, what’s the point of the test?

It’s like being allowed to write your own final exam, and all you need to pass the exam is 90% correct on the questions you wrote for yourself.

Agreed. Sigh. I’m considering the P9 Pro simply because of the improved modem and fingerprint reader. The AI is useless to me.

I’m still trying to figure out why the new Chromecast needs AI.

Oh shit, somebody go find Ja Rule! We gotta know what celebrities think about this.

claimed an objective opinion, and that supposed to have data and a study to back it

Not “someone”. Me. And I linked to the paper, which itself had many links to other studies backing up my claim. You essentially said “nuh uh, more sources” without providing any of your own. Your bad faith arguments don’t work here, go back to Xitter.

so let’s get the data and compare

Yes, let’s get the data. You first. You’re really good at telling other people to go get data and sources. Show us how it’s done.

My brother in christ, drones are all over that paper. Have you read an academic paper before? Do you know how to follow sources in papers? Tell you what, you go find some sources of your own and we can compare. Sitting back and saying “nuh uh” ain’t gonna do it. Put up or shut up.

Yes, I do. Here you go champ.

Objectively yes.

That’s the joke. Nearly every proposed implementation of AI isn’t actually solving a real business or tech problem. It’s just the next snake oil, like block chain, quantum computing, etc. There are real, valid use cases for all of those things. But most companies have no idea what they really are, how they might help, and even if they could help, what it would take to implement to see real results.

It’s not just the lead you’d have to worry about. Commercial jets spew all kinds of nasty shit, and there’s also the significant amount of particulates in the air from the tires. It’s just not safe nor healthy to live that close to an airport, lead or no lead.

Also, I would absolutely not eat the produce from those farms, which according to TFA, they’re still producing and selling locally.

It reminds me of how tech companies are all scrambling to use AI. There was a funny article recently where the author pointed out that these companies are struggling to do very basic things, so the idea that they could somehow tackle AI in a way that’s useful and profitable is silly.

Here’s the article, very entertaining and worth the read.

This sounds like the setting for a Guy Ritchie film.

Encouraging cleanliness is not the point at all. The point is: "… policing methods that target minor crimes, such as vandalism, loitering, public drinking and fare evasion, help to create an atmosphere of order and lawfulness. " Source.

In the specific case that OP is referring to with Giuliani and NYC: “Bratton directed the police to more strictly enforce laws against subway fare evasion, public drinking, public urination, and graffiti.”

Just imagine the average reddit, twitter, facebook, and instagram content. Then realize that half of that content is dumber than that. That’s half of what these AI models use to learn. The “smarter” half is probably filled with sarcasm, inside jokes, and other types of innuendo that the AI at this stage has no chance of understanding correctly.

Have you watched any of the presidential debates in the last decade or two? How is this even a question at this point?

I won’t watch any more debates until they do this.

It wasn’t. Fisker’s shitty response is what made it an even bigger deal.

Friend, I’ve read this three times and still have no idea wtf you’re trying to say.