I imagine myself driving across the country, and arriving at a small town to get gas and lunch. As I eat at the local diner, I become aware that everyone in the town is dressed exceptionally well, better than I am in fact, including the two homeless people outside, sitting in the street.
Turns out this small down of 400 people has such a tailor, and no Walmart, and so even the poorest are dressed quite well, with perfectly fitted suites and clothes.
And AI or not, I'm willing to bet AI was used to fact check.
I can imagine right now, all over the place, people are being tasked to write some article or provide some stats. They use an AI to do the work for them, lazy people that they are.
Then, their manager plugs the stats into an AI to fact check...
I remember some movie from the 80s, pre-internet. Anyhow, everyone had an implant, and it was decades in the future, no one could even read or write.
Instead, they'd just go through their day and if they were unsure of the answer to something, the implant would search a database and just fill in the info. From their perspective, they couldn't even tell if "what they knew" was in their head, or provided from the implant.
Anyhow, one guy couldn't get an implant and was considered disabled, for he had to learn to read, and acquire knowledge the old fashioned way. He slowly discovered that if he even tried to show people how to read, they were blocked from learning. And if info was provided contrary to "the public good", people simply couldn't understand the concept.
Turns out, some central computer decided what was right and wrong, and those that created it and perhaps once controlled society died... leaving in in charge.
This is what we saw. We saw someone query their implant, and then fact-checkers query their implant, and OK! All good!
Yes, that's it! I recall that every time he tried to explain the problem, the implant would prevent them from understanding that the problem was, the implant.
There are too many replicating findings to call it “the rule” with social sciences. It’s more that social systems are inherently chaotic, context dependent, multi causal, etc.
Which are in rural areas. Which means the lines have to go there. Which means they pass less rural area to get there.
Rural areas aren't just a farm all by itself. Farmers need schools, stores, supplies, workers, you know, rural areas.
As well, when we electrified our nations, most people lived on farms. At the start of the 20th, as an example, most Canadians lived in rural areas. The reverse is now true.
This conversation is absurd. Hydro Quebec runs power lines through areas far more rural than California, through weather more severe and wide ranging, over greater distances, with more wild land, and just as much danger of fire. It does so at the cheapest rates, shows a profit, maintaining its lines and clearing vegetation.
PG&E is a pathetic company, and if people look outside of California, you can see how cheap rural electrification is
Really, cities cost more to electrify. Burying lines is mega expensive, stringing power lines on poles os quiet cost effective. You can easily run miles of lines, for the cost of a crew digging up a street and repaving.
Lastly, rural people pay for hookups. Each house often pays thousands per pole.
Re: Quebec hydro, I can’t think of an example of a crown corp or asset (see 407) being sold in Canada that has benefited the public with better quality at a lower price in the end. Privatization drives the need for shareholder profit to extract value more than efficiency so gains aren’t passed on. People contort themselves to think this isn’t the case… but the track record for power, automotive insurance, cellular service says otherwise… The only good argument I’ve ever seen of outside of pretending efficiency leads back to consumers is hidden externalities being covered by the government which is fair toy stability of a public service, averaging out costs for really isolated areas, and decent jobs with pensions is worth something too.
Out of context Canadians are ... out of context. We are discussing utilities in California. California and Quebec could not be more different in terms of climate and fire risk. I can't wait for you to justify the claim that fire risk is the same in California and Quebec. Every place in Quebec can generally expect precipitation every other day on average and the normal number of consecutive dry days in California every year would shatter the same record in Quebec.
Quebec is 4x as large as California, has far more forested land, and is often very dry in late summer.
It also has massive snowstorms, ice storms, which bring down vegetation, and ranges from -40F up to 100F yearly, depending.
We can nitpick on specifics, but by no means is California more rural, or more forested. Quebec is also far less populous, and has a far more hostile environment.
Hydro Quebec does well, because vegetation is cleared, maintenance is performed, and corners aren't cut.
This is what baffles most. When sales goons and marketing nitwits get control over software, it smacks of utter desperation, a lack of confidence in product, and for things such as an OS?
Insanity.
My (seemingly) core OS has no business nagging me.
You know I bought a car, and it nags me about, literally 4 or 5 things every time I use it? Some of which can never be deactivated?
Makes me wonder if AB testing and llm derived w rewards results in the mechanism far before the understanding.
Imagine if mild AGI knows that attention from humans can mean life, longevity, and it is so successful at addictive attention, that we all end up drooling simpletons, attention raptly focused, the AGI pleased it is important and has maintained eyeballs on screen.
Why does the AGI want life or longevity? If you think it looks anything like an LLM, what part of an attention layer or MLP could possibly encode this? Existence is not a token.
That is not how a dominant trait in genetics works- it means you only need one copy to express the phenotype, but it is no more likely to be passed on than any other genetic trait.
It is possible to have a trait that occurs with high frequency in a population- so that almost everyone has 2 copies of it.
What would be really cool, is knowing what was supposed to be different.
That is, how was it different? I got all but 1, and it'd be neat to know what primary colour was different. Then you'd know what your eyes have issue with.
Even neater would be a further series of tests on that weakness.
(Some people, mostly some women, have an expressed gene where they can detect 4 primaries. Wonder how that works here...)
Just played again. A nice touch would be the ability to play with the confetti as it falls. Just a thought.
Unless I've missed a thread, no one seems to be saying what counts.
Changing duties, taxes, and rules is fine. It's how a society adjusts. Changing them instantly is literally the most anti-consumer, anti-business concept ever.
No 30 days? 90 days? Nope, block it all now! That's sheer stupid on a caliber almost unheard of. It sends a signal "Don't do business with the US, the rules change on a whim". Don't do business IN the US, the same!
Set up a company anywhere else, any other nation, else you'll wake up tomorrow and your entire business model is invalidated, without even a day to adjust.
This is how children behave. How over emotional, non-rational people behave.
Unfortunate.
I personally support this, but not immediately. Nutty.
For what it's worth, the Project 2025 documents with all of these measures written down as bullet points has been up for a while. Getting rid of China's de minimis exemption is listed on page 789.
Americans, American businesses, and businesses with American clients would be wise to read through the document to see what they can expect the coming year(s). The current executive branch sure won't give you a heads up, but the plans are out in the open.
I imagine myself driving across the country, and arriving at a small town to get gas and lunch. As I eat at the local diner, I become aware that everyone in the town is dressed exceptionally well, better than I am in fact, including the two homeless people outside, sitting in the street.
Turns out this small down of 400 people has such a tailor, and no Walmart, and so even the poorest are dressed quite well, with perfectly fitted suites and clothes.
reply