Yes: you get reliable source information and don’t get inaccurate summaries. E.g. last week I used Gemini to answer a plant biology question and got two contradictory answers based on minor variations in the wording because it incorrectly relied on blog spam over peer-reviewed articles for the first query.
The initial false answer was baldly asserted by the LLM without sources in the first two paragraphs but some of the phrasing it used was enough to locate the non-authoritative blog content it was apparently laundering. Had it accurately cited sources, it would’ve been easy to see that this random WordPress site saying X wasn’t as authoritative as the PubMed hits saying !X.
Nazis are bad because they deny other people’s freedom to exist.
That LGBTQ flag doesn’t say straight people are wrong or shouldn’t exist. Literally all it’s saying is that people are welcome to exist publicly as their true selves. The odds are high that those kids know someone who falls under that umbrella, and this is an age appropriate way to say that’s okay just as straight people’s mating habits are discussed at the level of “mommy and daddy loved each other so much they got married and had you”.
Nothing really. Unless your world view is somehow anchored on identity political symbols.
Disgust can be a very strong emotion you can have towards others and in that case, you could have issues with inclusion and human dignity regarding $people_i_dont_like. Thankfully, 3 year olds in kindergarden dont care about any of this, yet.
Your post is very long on inflamed political rhetoric but short on coherent arguments or facts. After reading it, I would know that you’re a Republican but still have no idea that the Chancery judge’s “activism” wasn’t, say, seizing the means of production but responding to a allegations of conflicts of interest brought in a lawsuit by another very rich person representing a group of shareholders.
40% of Americans never do, and many of the people who do don’t buy it themselves. For example, elderly people are one of the groups which disproportionately lack current photo ID but would also be more likely to have relatives helping with their shopping or simply not being carded either because they’re visibly far past the limit or have been buying at the same place for ages.
Yes to all of that. Your experience is not universally shared, and the people who are affected disproportionately belong to specific groups which have been discriminated against in the past (e.g. Native Americans on a reservation are more likely not to have a short trip to a local post office).
Here’s a summary from 2012 by people who study this professionally:
I would also note that in theory, this is a fixable problem and no election security expert I’ve heard of opposes doing it in the right order (make ID universally available before disenfranchising anyone), they’re just quick to note that there’s absolutely no evidence that it would make a difference in outcomes despite the high cost.
Each of those claims is not only incorrect but reveals a deep lack of knowledge about all of the measures taken to improve election security in the current century, not to mention the apparent unawareness of the lack of a leftist political party in power.
We already have an electoral system which people who aren’t actively mislead trust. The problem is the same as in other areas where something established far beyond reasonable doubt, such as the reality of climate change or vaccine efficacy and safety, is questioned not because facts are lacking but because a multi-billion dollar propaganda network pushed false claims for political purposes.
Copyright law isn’t binary and has long-running allowances for fair use which take into consideration factors like scale, revenue, and whether it replaces the original. As a real non-profit, the Internet Archive is not selling its copies of the NYT and it’s always giving full credit to the source. In contrast, ChatGPT does charge for their output and while it may give citations that’s not a given.
Beyond the questions about human braking, this seems worse than the dedicated AEB systems many vehicles are using now. Do they really use the full stack for this case instead of a faster collision avoidance path? I remember some of their people talking about concurrency back in the DARPA Grand Challenge days and it seems like this would be a high priority for anyone working on a system like this.
Predating Trump’s first term, the fringe right had conspiracy theories about elite child trafficking rings and those increasingly became part of the Republican mainstream as they proved a useful rallying point against Clinton (targeting her husband) and as an explanation for what motivated the “deep state” bogeyman used to explain every failure. That’s long enough ago that there are Republican members of Congress who rose to that level by beating more moderate Republican incumbents.
Trying to reverse that is a political minefield after they spent a decade and many millions of dollars pumping up the idea that there’s a massive conspiracy among the political elites. They spent basically Biden’s entire presidency saying he was helping the coverup to boost Trump’s election, but I think his people were hoping enough people would lose interest and they could quietly drop it with some stunt like Bondi’s empty binders. This is the first time they’re more or less publicly recognizing that Trump doesn’t entirely control the MAGA agenda.
The initial false answer was baldly asserted by the LLM without sources in the first two paragraphs but some of the phrasing it used was enough to locate the non-authoritative blog content it was apparently laundering. Had it accurately cited sources, it would’ve been easy to see that this random WordPress site saying X wasn’t as authoritative as the PubMed hits saying !X.
reply