Contrary to that we need drugs in many situations in life. There are the obvious examples where you need opiates for alleviation of extreme pain and the less obvious ones like using stimulants to help manage ADHD but there are many other medical and non medical reasons. Caffeine and alcohol are both useful in daily life but I believe many other drugs could be similarly useful if properly adopted into social norms. Yes there will always be cases of abuse but our effort should be on helping those individuals to recover rather than enforcing a blanket ban that does much more harm. In fact, I believe that many of the people who become addicts would not if they lived in a society where there were social structures that allowed them to use the appropriate drugs in the right amounts to help them function in their daily lives.
They would likely accept it if it came with strict requirements that the addicts must also undergo counseling and engage in a job/housing search if they are currently unemployed or homeless. It’s not punishment that most people on the right want, it’s personal responsibility of which being punished for criminal activity is just a small component. If the addicts using these centres were demonstrated to be making real progress towards getting clean and reintegrated into society then the vast majority of conservatives would support them. The opposition is to a policy that is essentially no different from legalizing opium dens that support only the habit without requiring treatment.
b and c aren’t really applicable if you use modern methods for producing the decoration and still use concrete for the underlying structure. Modern builders just hate decoration due to bias. I’m not even sure cost is necessarily a reason because lots of bizarre and unnecessary structure is added to some buildings just to make them unique.
If you know the outcome is favourable then you go all in. Right now the other competitors are just trying to match GPT4, if they knew AGI was achievable then they would throw everything they have at it in order to not be left out.
I see no reason why this is a problem. We built analogs of many things before we fully understood how they work. Most of human progress has worked this way through an empirical approach. Makes sense since the real world is the ultimate sandbox and the final judge of an idea’s applicability.
What you’re proposing is equivalent to training a monkey (or a child for that matter) to punch buttons that correspond to the symbols it sees without actually teaching it what any of the symbols mean.
Easy, don’t be incompetent and don’t abuse your power for personal gain. People aren’t as dumb as you think they are and they will see right through that bullshit and quit rather than follow idiot tyrants.
This couldn’t be more wrong. The big thing we learned from this episode is that Sam and Greg have the loyalty and respect of almost every single employee at OpenAI. Morale is high and they’re ready to fight for what they believe in. They didn’t “cut the head off” and the only snake here is D’Angelo, he tried to kill OpenAI and failed miserably. Now he appears to be desperately trying to hold on to some semblance of power by agreeing to Sam and Greg coming back instead of losing all control with the whole team joining Microsoft.
Having the test achieve its goals would be good but this is still a prototype and just one in a series that will be tested to destruction. The big deal is that the process of developing this launch system is moving again.
Finally, I can’t wait until they start loading these with starlink satellites and launching once a month. I’d love to make the trip to see one in person once the timing is more predictable. Seeing the progress on Starship is one of the few things that gives me hope for the future.
Weird that 4 wouldn’t understand a clear directive to only output code but you can use the old trick of ending your message with three backticks and the language name:
‘’’sql
And if that fails, since you’re using the API give it clear instructions in the system prompt and then provide a few prompt-response examples showing how you’d like it to respond
China is not independent for the inputs both material and capital to those industrial processes. They also are not able to consume all they produce so a vast majority of their outputs would dry up if they were to start a trade war.
They’re also just techniques in art where the artist wants you to feel something specific rather than just dumping their creation on you without comment.