lichess.org is a fantastic online chess platform for players of all skill levels. it’s free and—what’s more–it’s ad-free (unlike the parasitic organisation that’s squatting on the chess.com domain).

it has one-on-one on-demand match-ups, tournaments, puzzles, user-published training courses, multiple chess variants, and so much more.

it’s one of only two online resources to which i deem donating regularly worthwhile (the other being wikipedia).

do check it out. chess is one really healthy mental habit to inculcate.

perhaps it’s the limit imof each data type?!

gemini harvests only your first four cobtacts, your last two locations, and so on.

how does one defeat that? have fewer than four friends and don’t go out!

bot users? yes!

human users? well, yes.

if ceo assassinations were a tenth as common as school shootings, the usa would have the toughest gun control laws in the world.

read “the tightrope men” by desmond bagley. it’s a novel set in finland that uses exactly this premise.

but that’s the beaury of email! people don’t need to be on the same app to communicate with each other!

that arbitrary walled-off garden of whatsapp doesn’t hamper anyone here!

just don’t use whatsapp? problem solved!

#returntoemail

watch the video on the rules for rulers by the youtube channel cgpgrey for one explanation.

this fairly informative response has downvotes, ironically.

downvoting something only because you disagree with its contents is a sign of immaturity. it screams, “i personally don’t like this viewpoint so i’ll do everything in my power to suppress it from everyone else.”.

the mature response would be to leave the voting buttons alone and provide instead a measured response of the reasons for your disagreement.

you do know how to use the oxford comma, i’ll grant you that.

yeah, but it can do really cool things like “suggest a name for my project that does X”.

surely that game’s worth the candle, yes?

these sources cover the story pretty well:

NPR

The Lancet

the story to fixate upon there is how the cia located bin laden in the first place – by having agents pose as international aid workers dispensing the polio vaccine in pakistan.

this one act has led to a distrust in aid workers in that country and the flourishing of polio. countless innocent lives ruined, but i’m sure uncle sam considers those as adequate compensation against killing one man who had sequestered hinself away with his goats and his porn.

we should care less about how that one man was buried then and more about how the polio-ridden corpses of children are treated today.

burial and cremation, as practices, should be be dispensed with altogether.

i want my eventual corpse to be donated to a green burial.

while you may be right, one would think that the problem lies in the overestimated peception of the abilities of llms leading to misplaced investor confidence – which in turn leads to a bubble ready to burst.

… bunch of douchebag techbros thinking it’s going to solve all the world’s problems with no side effects…

one doesn’t imagine any of them even remotely thinks a technological panacaea is feasible.

… while they get super rich off it.

because they’re only focusing on this.

i’ve never been comfortable with the usage of the term “outing gay men” in this specific fairly negative context.

their fallacy isn’t being gay – that by itself is nothing wrong and should never be associated with a public shaming exercise.

no, the problem in this scenario is their hypocrisy in denigrating other gay men for their activities while indulging in those activities themselves.

this whole series of events should be called “exposing the hypocrisy of loud-mouths” instead of “outing gay men”.

big talk from someone with McSwag in their username!

be like the tree; let the dead leaves drop.

In general, the report found that the AI summaries showed “a limited ability to analyze and summarize complex content requiring a deep understanding of context, subtle nuances, or implicit meaning.” Even worse, the Llama summaries often “generated text that was grammatically correct, but on occasion factually inaccurate,”

how is this being accepted? one would have to go through any output with a fine-toothed comb anyway to weed out ai hallucinations, as well as to preserve nuance and context.

it’s like the ai tells you that mona lisa has three eyes and a nose and her mouth is closed but her denim jacket is open. you’re going to report that in your story without ever looking at the painting?