https://openai.com/index/march-20-chatgpt-outage/

"We took ChatGPT offline earlier this week due to a bug in an open-source library which allowed some users to see titles from another active user’s chat history. It’s also possible that the first message of a newly-created conversation was visible in someone else’s chat history if both users were active around the same time."

You are probably right about this particular LaTeX issue though.

The main issue I had was it was surprisingly hard to get the model to consistently strip commas from dollar values, which broke the csv output I asked for. I gave up on prompt engineering it to perfection, and just looped around it with a regex check.

Otherwise, accuracy was extremely good and it surfaced a few errors in my spreadsheets over the years.

But what it seems like you're saying is checkpoint inhibitors don't "enrage/activate" the immune system, and they only target tumours, and both points are misleading if not outright wrong.

And it's not always specific to tumours. My wife's thyroid got wiped out. The endocrinologist said it was like bombing a paint factory: first a massive spike in thyroid hormones, then a crash as no more were produced.

More info on the potential side effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors: https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/types/immunoth...

It's so good that I often do this preemptively to avoid a compile/deploy/test cycle.

It's not exactly a shortcut, and maybe it was just luck, but I suspect the key is just to start building with what you have and show a trajectory. The best part is that coding with ChatGPT-4 as a "colleague" has made the whole thing super fun.

1. It lowers the activation energy of getting started; for me motivation tends to come after action, and it gets me to that point.

2. It taps into the intense drive of "someone is wrong on the internet!" as per https://xkcd.com/386/

3. It's a new and different way of working so it doesn't trigger the same mental scar tissue.

4. It's vaguely social and high-status (delegating tasks, correcting and reviewing), as opposed to feeling solitary, so it tickles different reward centres.

5. More gets done for the same effort, so the cost/benefit equation is better and the feedback loop tighter.

That's one problem with treating the implementer as a machine to run code. The whole procedure can't be tested, so when parts are changed they can break the whole. It relies on the human in the loop to resolve the conflicts, which is not repeatable.

The other problem is the "mind-numbing" part. No-one can maintain 100% perfection all of the time. And in the context of presenting to people who don't know what it all means, I can see why mistakes would be made.

I'm sure humans have similar instincts. For example, the tendency of young kids to avoid plants until they are shown that they are edible - possibly leading to the general preference of artificial foods over anything that might be found in a garden. [1]

I've also noticed that toddlers don't gravitate towards knives the same way they do everything else. I certainly wouldn't rely on this behaviour, but I've noticed it in my own children and others.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/12/why-babie...

It's mostly a variant sudoku channel but Mark Goodliffe is an insanely good cryptic crossword solver, and both Simon and Mark are good teachers.

Beyond the intro the key skills are: parsing the clues into definition and wordplay, knowing signifiers for different types of wordplay, recognising common abbreviations (there are lists a web search away), recalling short synonyms, and anagramming.

If you want to get your mind blown I highly recommend spending the $2 for Cracking the Cryptic's Patreon to watch Mark solve the Monthly Club Special using almost pure wordplay and whatever string manipulation coprocessor he has in his head (which also seems to work for sudoku too).

Since then I've pronounced it in English as "dub dub dub" and found people generally understand it. I hope it catches on.

Re: the chromatic aberration spread, see e.g. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3716229/

They measured 1.82 diopters between 420nm and 660nm. Visible light is a bit wider, 380nm to 720nm, so 2 diopters is about right.

You easily can see this in a dark data centre. If your vision is perfectly corrected (which normally means perfect for red-green light) you won't be able to focus on a blue LED unless you are about 50cm away.