The answer says “any character” not “any characters”, so it is still correct.

Buffalo bison that other Buffalo bison bully also bully Buffalo bison.

There are three groups, the bullies, the bullied bullies, and the bullied.

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

You are ignoring ALL of the of the positive applications of AI from several decades of development, and only focusing on the negative aspects of generative AI.

Here is a non-exhaustive list of some applications:

• In healthcare as a tool for earlier detection and prevention of certain diseases
• For anomaly detection in intrusion detection system, protecting web servers
• Disaster relief for identifying the affected areas and aiding in planning the rescue effort
• Fall detection in e.g. phones and smartwatches that can alert medical services, especially useful for the elderly.
• Various forecasting applications that can help plan e.g. production to reduce waste. Etc…

There have even been a lot of good applications of generative AI, e.g. in production, especially for construction, where a generative AI can the functionally same product but with less material, while still maintaining the strength. This reduces cost of manufacturing, and also the environmental impact due to the reduced material usage.

Does AI have its problems? Sure. Is generative AI being misused and abused? Definitely. But just because some applications are useless it doesn’t mean that the whole field is.

A hammer can be used to murder someone, that does not mean that all hammers are murder weapons.

The source paper is available online, is published in a peer reviewed journal, and has over 600 citations. I’m inclined to believe it.

That’s why these systems should never be used as the sole decision makers, but instead work as a tool to help the professionals make better decisions.

Keep the human in the loop!

Not all diabetes is caused by excess sugar intake

I would use single x and y when they are meant to replace numbers, and multiple xx and yy when replacing text.

E.g.

• “We sold x books yesterday”
• “Did xx stop by yesterday and pick up the books?”

While there might be some truth to that, I don’t think MS 365 would qualify as “developed for the government.”

1. I imagine that the company would have the burden of proof that any of these criteria are fulfilled.

2. Third-party rights most likely refers to the use of third-party libraries, where the source code for those isn’t open source, and therefore can’t be disclosed, since they aren’t part of the government contract. Security concerns are probably things along the line of “Making this code open source would disclose classified information about our military capabilities” and such.

Switzerland are very good bureaucracy and I trust that they know how to make policies that actually stick.

As long as it’s maintained. Wrong documentation can often be worse than no documentation.

I was making that reference

moo*

Comment should describe “why?”, not “how?”, or “what?”, and only when the “why?” is not intuitive.

The problem with comments arise when you update the code but not the comments. This leads to incorrect comments, which might do more harm than no comments at all.

E.g. Good comment: “This workaround is due to a bug in xyz”

Bad comment: “Set variable x to value y”

Note: this only concerns code comments, docstrings are still a good idea, as long as they are maintained

Example: https://www.rt.com/pop-culture/600410-germany-gelsenkirchen-renamed-taylor-swift/

Except for the final paragraph, it is very non-political, and easily verifiable to be true.

I want to be clear that I do not condone or support using these types of sources, since it funds non-democratic governments, but simply dismissing all of their stories as “fake news” without any further critical thinking or fact checking is not correct.

1. In what way is it not covered, according to you?

2. If the news story is, e.g., non-political, does not try to influence your opinion on something, and is based on first-party facts that can be independently verified and that are correctly represented, the source does not matter for the factuality of the news story, even if it is from a non-democratic source.

That’s covered under “Consider the source.”

The source having ties to a non-democratic government does not automatically invalidate the source, but it should make you scrutinize it more sceptically in relation to the other criteria.

It literally says “and” on the second to last row

Not to be too pedantic, but Californium is Cf

Damn right, you’d miss the Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster drink before the dinner. Not ok.