Jabbles

Sounds like we're not far off an AI that can play Civilization

What is the meaning of the numbers?

> Weighted mean detector score 0.5307

Does it mean that that passage would be rated a 53% chance of being watermarked? So you would need a passage 10x as long to be reasonably sure of providence?

I think it's quite rude to reply to a well thought out comment with AI slop

1,000,000 / 3,600 = ~278

This is comparable to datacenters in space. We have no idea whether:

a) it is possible to construct such a scanner

b) the results of a scan would be able to diagnose anything

c) the false-positive rate would be low enough to make this useful

But it is probably very good as a source of speculation to hype the valuation of the company, because iff the above issues are solved, then this could be very valuable.

> Engineers at google have publically stated that the models are too big and are far from their potencial

Can you link to a source?

Please fix your graph so the names of the models are readable

> CEFR B2 which is fluent

That certainly is controversial. I don't think many people would consider anyone who is fluent to only be B2.

Talking in terms of "carbon" is misleading. Methane is much more potent than CO2. I don't know why you think methane is broken down at the same rate as it is added.

- Cattle release methane

- Forests are burnt to make room for crops/grazing

- Fertilizer for crops for cattle produces nitrous oxide

I do not claim this adds up to 60%, but to suggest it is zero is incorrect.

re 2: special relativity is not general relativity - large elements will not provide testable predictions for a theory of everything that combines general relativity and quantum mechanics.

re: "GR environments (such as geostationary satellites)" - a geostationary orbit (or any orbit) is not an environment to test the interaction of GR and QM - it is a place to test GR on its own, as geostationary satellites have done. In order to test a theory of everything, the gravity needs to be strong enough to not be negligible in comparison to quantum effects, i.e. black holes, neutron stars etc. your example (1) is therefore a much better answer than (2)