As students work through lessons on subjects like math, reading, and science, the AI system will analyze their responses, time spent on tasks, and even emotional cues to optimize the difficulty and presentation of content
This will be a nightmare for any neuro-divergent students, or really any student with atypical learning needs.
I thought they would give some meaningless response and people prodding them for a real reason would get the truth out eventually. But no, they just come out and say it in their first response:
Thanks for the contribution here and appreciate your attention to detail. We have decided to keep as-is.. part of that decision is that more and more folks are using AI chat to access guidance and tables don't always translate well in that context.
Yeah, and that's where the child analogy fails. He's not actually a child. He's not learning and exploring the world. Learning is likely one of the things Trump hates the most, because it would imply he doesn't already know the answer.
Mirror proteins behave much like their natural counterparts, with one important difference: They take much longer to break down. That’s because the natural enzymes that normally degrade proteins have shapes that are adapted for attacking left-handed proteins.
They cannot grip mirror proteins and cut them into fragments.
The virtual non-existence of enzymes that can break down right-handed proteins is almost assuredly because their use is vanishingly rare in life on Earth right now. If mirror life did escape the lab and find some way to thrive, normal life would suffer until some normal bacteria happened to mutate and create enzymes that could break it down.
I expect it to be like the Carboniferous period. Trees evolved, and nothing was around that could break down lignin, so they thrived for millions of years and caused devastation to ecosystems of the time. But dead trees represented a lot of untapped raw materials, so eventually other life evolved to break them down.
I would expect the same with mirror life. All else being equal, a few million years of devastation until life evolved ways to fight back. Or humans could dramatically speed that up by genetically engineering normal life (bacteria) with the tools to break down mirror proteins and thus attack mirror cells. It would still be devastating and would completely reshape life on the planet, but it may let humanity squeak through and continue existing.
They didn't put in the biggest bid. They put in a bid that was a smaller amount of cash bundled with a waiver from the Sandyhook families that were to get a damages payout that they forgo their damages claim.
The third party evaluating the bids decided this was a better deal for Infowars' creditors, as that meant more of the bankruptcy money would be going to them, so that's why it was chosen.
To be extra clear, burning an American flag that you purchase or otherwise own is legal, first-amendment-protected free speech. Burning someone else's American flag is not. This person allegedly took down federally-owned flags and burned them, hence destruction of federal property.
Can someone put this in broader context for me? I don't follow French politics closely, but my overall understanding of events the last time I looked was this:
France votes overwhelmingly for right-leaning parties in the EU democratic governing body (EU parliament?)
Macron, French President and part of the centrist party, dissolves government and calls snap elections, hoping to get ahead of an apparent rightward shift that could take him from power
Frances votes not overwhelmingly but by plurality in left leaning parties, reducing the far-right's momentum but still significantly reducing Macron's party's power
Rather than work with the left that received the plurality of the vote, Macron forms a coalition with the right-wing parties to form a government
Is this background accurate? (As an American, my understanding of parliamentary systems is spotty.) What happened between the formation of the new government and this no-confidence vote? And where does it look like things are headed?
Not OP, but in my circles the simplest, strongest point I've found is that no cryptocurrency has a built-in mechanism for handling mistakes. People are using these systems, and people make mistakes. Without built in accommodations, you're either
Creating real risk for anyone using the system, because each mistake is irrecoverable financial loss, and that's pretty much the definition of financial risk, or
Encouraging users to subvert the system in its core functionality in order to accommodate mistakes, which undermines the entire system and again creates risk because you don't really know how anything is going to work with these ad hoc side systems
Either way, crypto is just more costly to use than traditional systems when you properly factor those risks. So the only people left using it are those who expect greater rewards to offset all that additional risk, which are just speculators and grifters.
Wormholes modeled with mainstream physics are incredibly unstable, to the point that they collapse before even a single particle is able to traverse them. Proposals for ways to stabilize a wormhole rely on models that have not yet been confirmed by experiment. So any answer you get is going to be little more than conjecture, and I don't think you can get the scientific rigor it sounds like you're looking for.
Exactly. Ever skip a stone on the surface of a lake? It's like that, except it's a continuous skip, with air instead of water, and you're inside the stone.
It's an education system and culture problem. You can't force a 40-year-old woman to be curious and critical, but you can plant the seed and encourage the growth of those skills and behaviors in children. That confusion at hearing something different followed by the attitude of putting it in a box and dismissing it ("I don't know what that is, but we have regular hot tea") comes from a lifetime of being told to accept whatever over simplified answer they are told and be quiet whenever they ask questions.
Hmm, these numbers seem very low. I wonder how these scores were determined.
They weren't, because LLMs don't have reasoning ability, at least not in the way you as a human do. They are generative models, so the short answer is the model most likely made the numbers up, though there's a chance they pulled them directly from some training data that's likely completely unrelated to the user's prompt.
What they generate is supposed to have similar multidimensional correlation as the input data, so there are complex relationships between what the question asked and the output it gave, but these processes don't look anything like the steps you would go through to answer the same question.
I don't think that follows, because those are temporary conditions, and consuming the drug is a choice made by an individual not currently under the influence. So it's the person's responsibility before they consume the drug to prepare their environment for when they are under the influence. If they're so destructive under the influence that they can't not commit a crime, it is their responsibility not to take the drug at all.
Line graphs of percentages not based at zero make it difficult for me to grok the magnitude of changes. Missed opportunity for the hue line color to match the actual hue in the vertical. Just being an angle value I have no idea what hue it's supposed to be.
Been the only one in my family for years using Linux, but over the last few months struggles with Windows have basically resulted in all but one computer in the house being migrated to Linux.
Put it on my 10-year-old son's desktop because Windows parental controls have been made overly complicated and require Internet connectivity and multiple Microsoft accounts to manage. Switched to Linux Mint, installed the apt sources for the parental control programs, made myself an account with permissions and one for him without permissions to change the parental controls, and done. With Steam he can play all of the games in his library.
Only my wife is still using Windows, but with ads embedded in the OS ramping up, and features she liked getting replaced with worse ones, she's getting increasingly frustrated with Microsoft.
I don't think that word is required. If anything, I think
sometimes you come and pull the lever
sounds more natural, if you have to add a word. They're speaking more colloquially, rather than formally, but I don't think the original is grammatically incorrect.
Here I thought the in-fighting wouldn't start until after Trump had actually taken power.