I would if it was a native feature. I’d tag people “Made sense once, don’t block”

Why use an app for something that works perfectly fine via web browser as well? The less apps I have on my phone the better.

Well, it would - in the sense that an unbiased study might still find that a meat-eater (i.e. the average person) is less healthy than someone who doesn’t eat meat, and then falsely conclude that meat is the reason, rather than accounting for all the other lifestyle differences. Meanwhile, a study funded by Big Meat would obviously find that meat is good for you - which, let’s not forget, could also be true.

The issue with many of these studies is that they compare people who eat red meat to those who either avoid it specifically or don’t eat meat at all. The problem is, red meat isn’t the only variable at play. Vegans and vegetarians, in particular, are likely to have much healthier lifestyles overall than someone who eats red meat - which is more or less synonymous with the “average person.”

What I’d really like to know is the difference between red meat eaters with healthy lifestyles, compared to both the average person and those who don’t eat meat at all.

The people around you likely have a better understanding of it than you do. I’d argue that, deep down, you do know - but you don’t want to believe it if it feels like you’re not. Then a year after the breakup, you realize that you did, in fact, know all along.

Also keep in mind that “the right person” doesn’t exist. Everyone has their flaws. It’s a matter of what you’re willing to deal with.

If those 10% were picked completely at random, then it’s not obvious to me that this would be a good thing. It would effectively increase wealth inequality in the world, where 10% of any population is given something the rest don’t have. That kind of disparity builds resentment and could, in the long run, end up causing more harm than good. If there’s a poor village where nearly everyone is struggling, and suddenly 10% of the population has their basic needs guaranteed, they’d instantly become the “rich guys” of that village. You’d need to do it for the whole village - but then the same issue arises when people in the next village start resenting yours, and so on.

Either way, I’d give 0–2 fingers. I could probably live a perfectly normal life without my pinkies, but I’m not going to pretend I’d definitely go through with it - even if, from a strictly rational perspective, it’s kind of a no-brainer.

If you don’t like how AI is being hyped or used in business, fair enough. But saying it’s all just “permutation-based coding” isn’t accurate - it’s not some hard-coded script shuffling words around. These systems are trained on massive amounts of data to learn patterns in language, and they generate responses based on that. You can be skeptical without throwing out the whole concept or pretending it’s just smoke and mirrors.

The term artificial intelligence is broader than many people realize. It doesn’t refer to a single technology or a specific capability, but rather to a category of systems designed to perform tasks that would normally require human intelligence. That includes everything from pattern recognition, language understanding, and problem-solving to more specific applications like recommendation engines or image generation.

When people say something “isn’t real AI,” they’re often working from a very narrow or futuristic definition - usually something like human-level general intelligence or conscious reasoning. But that’s not how the term has been used in computer science or industry. A chess-playing algorithm, a spam filter, and a large language model can all fall under the AI umbrella. The boundaries of AI shift over time: what once seemed like cutting-edge intelligence often becomes mundane as we get used to it.

So rather than being a misleading or purely marketing term, AI is just a broad label we’ve used for decades to describe machines that do things we associate with intelligent behavior. The key is to be specific about which kind of AI we’re talking about - like “machine learning,” “neural networks,” or “generative models” - rather than assuming there’s one single thing that AI is or isn’t.

You don’t need a huge wrench when working with the p-trap under the sink and water wont start spraying everywhere either as drains aren’t pressurized.

Sprinklers react to heat, not smoke.

Not all spriklers go off at the same time in most systems. Only the sprinkler heads affected by heat.

The water coming out of sprinklers initially isn’t clear but dark, rusty sludge. Sometimes even black as ink.

DayZ, Minecraft, Cities: Skylines, Age of Empires 2 Definite Edition, Grand Theft Auto 5

6.9Gb on my Dropbox

It’s crazy how it sometimes feels like it’s no longer enough to simply not like something - instead, one has to make actively hating it a part of their identity. People get conditioned to be triggered by certain keywords, and it doesn’t seem to matter what is said afterward or what the nuances of the particular case are - they’ve already decided how to react.

Samsung Galaxy XCover 6 Pro and early 2015 Retina MacBook Pro 13"

Artificial intelligence isn’t synonymous with LLMs. While there are clear issues with training LLMs on LLM-generated content, that doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with the kind of technology that will eventually lead to AGI. If AI hallucinations are already often obvious to humans, they should be glaringly obvious to a true AGI - especially one that likely won’t even be based on an LLM architecture in the first place.

I remember seeing this video of two indian(?) guys drowning in a pond literally 2 meters from the shore. I mean… If I knew I couldn’t swim I wouldn’t go anywhere near water. It could just as well be lava.

I wish I could do this with the web version. I’d like to tag people “Made sense once - don’t block”

Somewhat related is the belief that things are simple rather than complex. I’d argue that thinking something is simple - or believing you have a solid understanding of it - should be a red flag that you probably don’t know as much as you think. I mean, when have you ever heard a true expert give a short and simple answer to anything?

Changing tires or oil on a car.

Time after time, I see people who should know better fail at basic things like this.

Even I don’t get called out for AI-written responses, even though a big number of my messages here are technically written by AI. The key difference is that I actually take the time to write a first draft of what I want to say, then run it through ChatGPT to help clean up my word salad - and finally, I go over the output again to make it sound like me. The thinking is mine. AI just helps me communicate more clearly.

I’d never ask it to write an entire response from scratch without providing structure or points I want to make. All I want is for the person reading my message to understand what I’m actually trying to say - so they can respond to that, not to a misinterpretation of what I was trying to say.

I’ll just leave that first draft here to illustrate my point:

Time after time I see people that should know better to fail at basic things like this.

Even I don’t get called out for AI responses even though a huge number of my messages posted here are technically written by AI. However, the difference here is that I actually took time to first write the first draft of what I want to say only then to give it for chatGPT to make sense of my word salad only for me to then go over it’s output to make it sound like me again. The thinking is done by me - AI only helps me to communicate more clearly. I’d never ask it to write the entire response from ground up without providing any structure and points about what I want to say. All I want is the person reading this message to get as clear of an understanding as possible of what I’m trying to say so that they can respond to that rather than to misintrepretation of what I was trying to say.

Finland - and zero days, since I’m self-employed. On the other hand, I can take a day (or even a week) off whenever I feel like it, and I only need to work about three days a week to cover my living expenses.

At my previous job, I used to get somewhere between 30 to 40 days of paid time off per year. It varied depending on the year and how many public holidays landed on weekdays.