What do you need that penis for? Rape or worse?

Which is illegal?

Makes sense someone removed it

Here we are.

You couldn’t have make more stupid argument.

No, this is done to ensure there’s no competition when selling games. Why do you think console games are pricier than PC ones? On PC we still have some competition.

Hi, could you share what phone you bought? I’m looking for a replacement in the near future and I want to get a headstart on the research.

Ummmm… According to YT, about 50% of new videos is AI generated (20% AI slop, 30% AI brainrot, don’t ask me whats the difference), and some industry analytics expect that to grow to 90%>

A debugger will always interfere with the processes you are looking at, hence making debugging of multithreading-related errors a game of whack-a-mole.

It’s a very pleasant debugging experience when you can easily switch threads, have them log what happened first, check the variables in the thread at the moment in time it was hit (vs now), etc. etc.

This and an easy way to attach a line-by-line debugger and I’m golden.

I believe that is a vast minority of developments. And tbh multithreading debugging is a breeze in C# on Rider (except race conditions, those will always be tricky, but also easily identifiable).

Huh? That is the literal opposite of what I said. Like, diametrically opposite.

The system summarizes and hashes docs. The model can only answer from those summaries in that mode. There’s no semantic retrieval step.

No, that’s exactly what you wrote.

Now, with this change

SUMM -> human reviews

That would be fixed, but will work only for small KBs, as otherwise the summary would be exhaustive.

Case in point: assume a Person model with 3-7 facts per Person. Assume small 3000 size set of Persons. How would the SUMM of work? Do you expect a human to verify that SUMM? How are you going to converse with your system to get the data from that KB Person set? Because to me that sounds like case C, only works for small KBs.

Again: the proposition is not “the model will never hallucinate.”. It’s “it can’t silently propagate hallucinations without a human explicitly allowing it to, and when it does, you trace it back to source version”.

Fair. Except that you are still left with the original problem of you don’t know WHEN the information is incorrect if you missed it at SUMM time.

The system summarizes and hashes docs. The model can only answer from those summaries in that mode

Oh boy. So hallucination will occur here, and all further retrievals will be deterministically poisoned?

So… Rag with extra steps and rag summarization? What about facts that are not rag retrieval?

A very tailored to llms strengths benchmark calls you a liar.

https://artificialanalysis.ai/articles/gemini-3-flash-everything-you-need-to-know (A month ago the hallucination rate was ~50-70%)

I want to believe you, but that would mean you solved hallucination.

Either:

A) you’re lying

B) you’re wrong

C) KB is very small

My only question is - would the issue be solved if you followed the manual properly?

Didn’t he knew by that time that there were also other creatures in the castle? And IIRC correctly by that time J was getting weaker, so I thought he thought he was hipnotised to think he ate, while in reality he was fasting.

men […] view relationships as a transaction

Meanwhile all the studies showing numbers (and reason behind them) of women who view relationship and sex as a transaction and trade sex for something, including a man being nice to them: Am I a joke to you?

• https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4875790/

• https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6217550_The_Factors_Influencing_Transactional_sex_Among_Young_men_and_Women_in_12_Sub-Saharan_African_Countries

• https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0277953609004651?via=ihub

(And more studies on “sugar daddy”, e.g. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33433242/ )

Tldr: it’s not even overgeneralization, it’s diminishing the female agency in the trade. Which I think is worse.

In the early 2010s there was a trend to throw in obfuscation into the minis.

All the science says don’t let your cat out.

Not really, no.

Cat wellbeing doesn’t say that. Cat depression rates in high enriched indoor environments neither. Keeping the cat indoors is like keeping the people forced to stay in home during Covid - it has negative wellbeing consequences.

Pointing at one specific stat and ripping it apart and claiming victory is exactly how we allowed climate change to just slip away for over 60 years now.

What the heck are you talking about? What stat? There are studies that show that the cats kill mostly rodents (Lowes et al.), and that average bird prey is old or sick. The biggest problem with bird population dropping is not invasive cat species, but invasive human species.

Bird loss is a function of habitat shrinking, climat change, pesticides and pollution. Any fix must focus on that instead of a cheap scapegoat. Do you know how I can tell that? Because the birds are dropping world wide (over 66% of bird species are in decline), outside of outdoor cat heavy areas you seem to want to focus on.

Plastic straws didn’t cause the climate change.

Midjourney is profitable.

Investing in OpenAi makes Altman money, not Chat Gpt. They spend last year trying to decrease the cost of a query after all.

I’m from EU. I’ve noticed that the maturing and openness is related to not being under the influence of USA culture (social media, tv, movies, etc). As in - the open, expressive, thinking guys in my bubble happen to be not watching TV, social medias, youtube and such.