Well, water is certainly more essential, yet it isn't free.

Food isn't free. Shelter isn't free.

Besides, the services you'd use over this free connection aren't (necessarily) free.

Its not unreasonable to suspect some other agenda, like easier propaganda, subsidising of social media, ...

They had a few people on the inside, who handed over Maduro to the US. May have been internal conflict in Venuzuela using US to get rid of Maduro.

Maybe US also had people on the inside in Iran, but killed them by accident on the first strike with the "precision bombings".

I'm gooing to try this question this weekend with some people, as h0 hypotesis i think the answer i will get would be usually like "what an odd question" or "why do you ask".

Involving blind people would be an interesting experiment.

Anyway, until the sixties the ability to play a game of chess was seen as intelligence, and until about 2-3 years ago the "turing test" was considered the main yardstick (even though apparently some people talked to eliza at the time like an actual human being). I wonder what the new one is, and how often it will be moved again.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43985513

As a trekkie this was a dream come true.

Unfortunately we still don't have a tricorder yet (despite Elisabeth Holmes' promise).

But we do have the apps and the games, they didn't have these in star trek. My phone is loaded with these (apps, not games)

A picture says more than a thousand words.

As much as I'd like to use a simple markdown based tool to create my presentations, most of these appear to come short regarding visuals (1).

Look at the 2007 iPhone introduction - thats how you use visuals to deliver a message.

Going from bullets to visuals is definitely not easy, and while I'm not as brilliant as Steve Jobs, I always give it my best shot. And a supporting tool makes it a lot easier.

(1) if anyone knows about a md-based slide creator supporting good visuals, I'm open to suggestions.

If you ask a human, they will answer 3. Sometimes they say 4. Or 2. That's it.

An LLM produces a text using an example it was trained on. They were trained with these elaborate responses, so that's what they produce.

Whenever chatgpt gets something wrong, someone at openai will analyse it, create a few correct examples, and put these on the pile for retraining. Thats why it gets better - not because it is smarter, but it's retrained on your specific test cases.

[edit] OK, :-( i missed that US has also huge tarifs on EV.

A joke I sometimes tell during conversations when australia comes up:

"You know, Australia is a great country so I once was thinking of migrating there. So I called the australian embassy. First thing they ask me is if I have a criminal record. So I answered oh I'm sorry, I didn't know that was still a requirement, and hung up."

(Think about a famous photographer who's showing a few great pictures you could never have made yourself. Well, he isn't showing the 10.000 others he made but were not good enough)

In a lawyers view, and a judge's view, some skilled expert "hackers" can, and its called hacking. (so i guess we're all hackers)

I once discussed these things with a (knowledgeable) lawyer. He explained you can just present almost anhthing in a court case, and when it isn't refuted, well then it's valid.

In a case my lawyer (same one) presented a printed out email. Other party did not claim it was false, so it's suddenly just as valid as a registered letter. (it was a genuine email).

In another unrelated case, the other party suddenly introduced a forged picture. If I hadn't been there at that moment (I wasn't supposed to actually), then suddenly it would have been proof.

Court cases are not about truth, and not about justice. They are about convincing the judge.