dwpdwpdwpdwpdwp

The implication would be that GPT-4.5 was not judged to be human 27% of the time. You can't determine how often humans were judged correctly as humans from that data point.

Ask a divorce lawyer that question.

I work for an global company in the industrial automation space. Not only is there is a major effort underway to offshore jobs and manufacturing from the US, but our customers around the world are pulling way back on capital expenditures, citing US policy uncertainties as a primary reason.

>>> "For each human, there could be thousands of robots, effectively an army of tireless servants for each individual."

yeah, blog at me after a few years of managing even a small fleet of robots

From the report:

> The MP initiated a conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers through the on-duty supervisor of flying (SOF)

"MP" is the pilot

> A conference hotel is a call that can be initiated by the SOF to speak directly with Lockheed Martin engineers to discuss an abnormality/malfunction not addressed in the PCL (Tab V-13.1, 14.1, 15.1, 16.1, 17.1). While waiting for the conference hotel to convene, the MP initiated a series of “sturns” with gravitational forces up to 2.5Gs, as well as a slip maneuver (i.e., left stick input with full right rudder pedal) to see if the nose wheel orientation would change (Tabs N-12, BB-201- 02). Upon visual inspection, the MW reported no change to the nose wheel (Tab N-13). The SOF informed the MP he was on the phone with the conference hotel and Lockheed Martin were getting the LG subject matter experts (SME)

So the pilot was, in effect, on the call, even if not directly on the phone. I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing an F-35 pilot had radio comms with the SOF who was on a phone line. It's a layer of indirection, but the pilot was essentially exchanging info in real time with the conference call. Its not a stretch to colloquially say that the pilot was "in the conference call"

You're shocked by how many billions go completely unaudited?

okay then...how many billions are completely unaudited?

“In batch mode, you

In watch mode, LlamaFS starts a daemon that watches your directory. It intercepts all filesystem operations, updates i and uses your most recent edits in context to proactively learn and how, so you don't learns predict how you rename file. e.g. if you create a folder for 2023 tax documents, and start moving 1-3 file in it, LlamaFS will automatically creates, and move the right!”

Come again? Was AI used to generate the documentation?

I would prefer a robotic, unrealistic voice so I don’t start subconsciously thinking I’m hearing a real human speak.

"Each megasat could then convert gigawatts of power into a microwave beam aimed precisely at a big field of receiving antennas on Earth. These rectennas would then convert the signal to usable DC electricity."

What are the consequences if, for some reason, the aim becomes not-so-precise?

I taught this problem to a group of high schoolers as part of a statistics curriculum. It was engaging for two reasons:

The topic of the vitriolic responses to Marilyn is not boring.

It’s a great problem for illustrating the importance of simulation in statistics. By breaking off into pairs, half of whom played the switch strategy and half of whom played the stay strategy, we did hundreds of trials and found empirical evidence in favor of Marilyn’s answer. Furthermore, by actually playing the game, whatever any ambiguity in the wording of the problem was quickly resolved.