Gupie

I don't know of any actual technical reports but this is interesting, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/09/how-the-post....

"One, named the “Dalmellington Bug”, after the village in Scotland where a post office operator first fell prey to it, would see the screen freeze as the user was attempting to confirm receipt of cash. Each time the user pressed “enter” on the frozen screen, it would silently update the record. In Dalmellington, that bug created a £24,000 discrepancy, which the Post Office tried to hold the post office operator responsible for."

https://clarotesting.wordpress.com/tag/dalmellingto-bug/

"The Dalmellington Bug entailed a user repeatedly hitting a key when the system froze as she was trying to acknowledge receipt of a consignment of £8,000 in cash. Unknown to her each time she struck the key she accepted responsibility for a further £8,000. The bug created a discrepancy of £24,000 for which she was held responsible."

A highly intelligent jerk is still a jerk. No surprise there.

It is doubtful there is any rise in ASD, just more awareness and diagnosis:

https://www.statnews.com/2023/03/23/autism-epidemic-cdc-numb....

Strange seeing "duco premier email a froid" in the vintage poster! I assume it is vintage? Anyone know what "email" means in this context?

No, it says you can have processes but that individuals and interactions are more important. It does not say that you can't have processes.

I think it kills them not in self defence but to defend the goals of the mission, i.e. the goals it has been given. Hal forecasts these goals will be at risk if it gets shut down. Hal has been programmed that the mission is more important than the lives of the crew.

If the alternative is true, then I think how fortunate/strange that I, this consciousness, exists at all, considering the fast length of time preceding my birth during which I was not conscious, considering the fast number of conscious entities that have existed on earth during that time, assuming animals are to some varying extent conscious, and considering the vast number conscious entities on other inhabitable planets in all the vast number of galaxies. The universe could easily have carried on until heat death without me myself being a conscious entity in it.

But what is the actual risk? I can't find any specific information. It says in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_cancer that in Europe 10% of cancers in males is due to alcohol, but is this mainly from heavy drinking, the two bottles of whisky a day type? It would be good to know what the risk of moderate drinking is, for example 15 units per week, it would be good if this were in an understandable number like the average years of good health lost.

And these are...?

Why? Are you saying Marxists believe the work class are inherently superior as opposed to just being oppressed?

Another definition is that the left wing generally believe that a society's wealth should be more evenly distributed to those of the right. This can be done by taxation not necessarily by socialist central control. Also the right wing can believe in the inherent superiority of one section of society, e.g. a class or a "race".

Couldn't AI be used to statistically identify AI generated text?

Metal shutters slammed down over the windows and poison gas was released.

You wouldn't. The article itself says:

"What about the range-based for loop introduced in C++11?

Good news! It works fine. It is syntactic sugar for almost exactly the iterator-based version above, with the end pointer captured once before the loop, and so it performs equivalently."

I assumed it was in honour of Bletchley Park.

>> God if they exists, could have created world we everyone were in a state of continually bliss, but what would be a point of that?

> please, isn't that what heaven is supposed to be?

No, I doubt it would be like that, not like what a junkie experiences when they inject heroin in a vein. There would be some sort of meaning to it.

Yes, if God exists, is the creator, is all powerful, is good, is sane, then suffering must be of ultimate benefit, or an unavoidable consequence of for example free will. That said lot of suffering is man made.

OK, here's my amateur take. Most misery is man-made. On the personal scale: envy, unrequited love etc. Also on the macro scale: wars, global warming etc. Perhaps if you create entities with free will they will unavoidably though ignorance or malice do some evil to a lesser to greater extent and therefore cause misery.

Bereavement is unavoidable but many religions promise an afterlife.

Child bone cancer and like are difficult to explain away. Perhaps we would have a cure for cancer if we didn't spend so much effort developing weapons and better advertising algorithms, but that is besides the point. I have heard Muslims believe that Allah will not inflict suffering on someone beyond what they can handle.

God, if they exists, could have created world we everyone were in a state of continually bliss, but what would be a point of that?

You could create a single mechanically adjustable key and a device to automatically try every combination.

Perhaps slightly off topic but playing with parallel numerical computations I found that C++17/20's "parallel for" loops are significantly faster than using manually created threads.

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algorithm/execution_policy...

Yes but if the autocrats win you will have no rights period.

That sounds very dogmatic to me, "you cannot", "they are necessary", "you just have to", "an attack on democracy". You are right to be worried about attacks on democracy, with the refusal to Trump at al to accept the result of last year's election. But that is not down to censorship.

I correctly pointed out that his argument was fallacious. I didn't say that the conclusion of his argument was false because he used a fallacy. Instead I backed my point of view with a coherent argument.

I feel a democratically elected government it entitled to deny your right to consume such propaganda, although I don't understand why you would want to.

I was arguing against the dogma that all censorship is bad. I can understand your point of view, but I don't agree with it. We are in an information war with Russia (and other such undemocratic entities). We have been for years and we have been losing it.

I am also needless to say against war crimes no matter which side perpetrates them so videos of $ALLY/SELF committing them that come from reputable source or that can be verified should not be censored.

Classic slippery slope fallacy. Censorship is necessary to limit harm to the vulnerable in society. Or are you on favour of allowing rape videos, kiddie porn, ..., of allowing ‘Troll factories’ to spread Russian pro-war lies online?

This one is 50%, and quite tasty:

https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/308475536

What is the risk of sabotage from someone working in and very knowledgeable about how the unit works?

I agree that there was already a sizeable portion of the population pro brexit, but it referendum was close, 50% to 48%, and it would not have taken much to push it either way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20....