Baader-Meinhof

I like that these AI idioms exist. They're like watermarks for text. It's worth the cost of humans avoiding them. Companies will eventually train their models to be undetectable, but society would be better if they didn't.

> Mark Zuckerberg overruled 18 wellbeing experts to keep beauty filters on Insta

Is there a source for this? The article doesn't seem to mention it. On that topic, should we update the title to match the article title?

To steel-man and provide a more charitable interpretation of last night:

1. Maduro stole an election. He is not legitimately in power. Many other people in power, like the military and other political factions, opposed this and wants him removed.

2. These people quietly oust Maduro in the middle of the night.

3. With the tacit approval of these folks, the US arrests Maduro for previously indicted crimes.

4. The US bombs some bases, providing plausible deniability to Venezuelan military. This was coordinated and the Venezuelans abandoned these sites ahead of time.

5. There is still stability because most of the people in charge are still there. Only the illegitimate president is gone. Venezuela can have a real election now.

Also anecdotally, I experienced the opposite. After three decades of constant fighting, the divorce was almost cathartic. Their marriage was more traumatic for me than their divorce.

Interestingly, their relationship became much better after and they are ok as friends now.

I think you have an outdated understanding of AI workflow. They generally cite their sources, which you should check, just like regular search.

I ask two types of questions:

1. Factual updates to an ongoing or recent story.

2. Analysis, e.g. "What were the economic effects of Brexit."

Without AI, I would try to read multiple opinions from different sides. But its hard for me to always know which experts to trust?

AI will present both sides, but even when AI is not hallucinating, there is still the issue of "are the experts that the AI is sourcing reliable?"

There's two parts:

1. Basic math, eg long division. This is what all the commenters are focusing on, and I largely agree with folks - we need to keep teaching this.

2. HS / College math. E.g. memorizing all the rules to solve integral calculus equations. Or solving all those circuits in Intro to EE. I agree with Wolfram here. At this point, students should be mentally developed enough to start focusing on formalizing and reducing problems rather than rote memorization or hand calculations. It's good to go over all the rules and practice a few times. But to make a whole quarter of it seems a bit much.

I'm not disagreeing with your overall point but this reads a bit like victim blaming. "Those sexy trains were manned so skimpily, and going down those long routes all alone at night, they were just asking for it!"

High-quality writing improves information dissemination. A paper like word2vec has probably been skimmed by 10's of thousands, perhaps 100's of thousands people.

One extra day of revising is nothing, comparatively.