What a poor write-up, neither defining the problem nor the solution with any clearity. Did anyone come away with any information that can be used for anything?
There is nothing wrong with unions, but they are a response to an imbalance in bargaining power. In places with lots of smaller employers, there is much less benefit.
One thing I've thought about is whether observations in the present can influence past events. I'm thinking it must be so, though probably only on a microscopic level.
Choice of how to measure + physical system -> Observations -> Interpretation of observations -> History
The choice of what and how to measure will influence the history you conclude, but that is true of actual "Caesar and Napoleon" history too, and in that case it's definitely not that past events are being changed, instead it is your knowledge of them. A really interesting principle is that any philosophical question that can be phrased without referring to ideas that only exist in quantum mechanics can usually be answered without referring to them.
Frankly, i don't think this is true at all. If anything I notice, for me, that I take better and more informed decisions, in many aspects of life. Think this criticism comes from a position of someone having invested alot of time in something AI can do quite well.
For me, the main question in this context would be whether the decisions are better informed or they just feel better informed. I regularly get LLMs to lie to me in my areas of expertise, but there I have the benefit that I can usually sniff out the lie. In topics I'm not that familiar with, I can't tell whether the LLM is confidently correct or confidently incorrect.
Well, AI does make errors, and never says "I don't know". That is also true of Wikipedia though. I've seen much improvement in accuracy from 3.5 to 4.5. Hallucinations can often be hashed out by a dialogue.
Wikipedia has multiple ways it tells you it doesn't know or it doesn't know for certain. Tags such as clarify, explain, confusing (all of which expand into phrases such as clarification needed etc) are abundant, and if an article doesn't meet the bar for the standard, it's either clearly annotated at the top of the article or the article is removed altogether.
I would say X is leading the way for more neutral content moderation, at least among the big platforms. Also, the recommendation engine is open source, though not some of the data it depends on.
If California does not do controlled burns to the underbrush like what nature or the American Indians were doing when the Conquistador arrived, then there will be more and more wildfires. This is regardless of climate change or what politicians are in power.
Maybe so, but could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments like this one and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42728555? A good comment needs more information than this.
If you know more than others, that's great, but then please share some of what you know so the rest of us can learn. If you don't want to do that or don't have time, that's fine, but in that case it's best to just accept that the internet is wrong about everything and not reply.
Because this isn't a very complicated topic. Cities built in bricks and stone don't burn. It is cheaper to clear brush than charred remains. If the fire insurance costs >$100/month, something is very wrong. Only complete mismanagement could have caused this. It does not happen in other places.
