We’re all secretly longing for the macbook wheel that was leaked over 15 years ago:

https://youtu.be/9BnLbv6QYcA

Off the top of my head, vi came out in the late 70s (though it might have been a little while later before you could start editing directly through vi)

I’m hoping this is partly a Porno for Pyros reference.

For me, the crazy takeaway of the article was just how high the acceptable level of lead is for toothpaste (the current FDA limit is 20,000ppb for fluoridated toothpaste).

Seminal fluid.

If you’re in a union already, that is not something that can generally be asked about by management, both at hiring or during your employment. Being in a union is not the same as being in a unionized workplace.

When employees of a store/factory/etc decide to unionize, there’s a point at which a specific larger union can be chosen to represent them (AFL-CIO, IBEW, Teamsters, etc). If successful, this is what allows for collective bargaining led by a union representative.

I did not. It was strongly tied in my childhood brain to the BRATT diet (recovering from nausea and vomiting).

It is sad that this guy just can’t let go.

Honestly though, if he can preemptively put sufficient funds into escrow dedicated to managing all aspects of the site and engineering plans for digging with minimal perturbation of each waste cell, then let him have it*.

(* Escrow amount should be approximately $780m)

Oh man, I love Noita so much, but it can be so difficult at times.

It’s so good, but I’m a bit sad that my current playthrough from last week can’t load into 1.0…

I think they might even hang out when they’re outside the office…

This reminds me a little of “A Tale in the Desert”.

The AI seemed to struggle with scientific names for #19.

The question

was answered as no, though the correct answer should have been yes.

So if the answer is yes and no (conditional versus a universal property of the thing), you always answer yes? I would consider that strange, but as long as it is applied consistently then I suppose it is fine.

It is interesting, but with weird quirks.

It is definitely capable of responding with 🤷‍♂️, but neglects to do so in some expected areas.

“does it use a microprocessor?” 👍 “was it invented before 1970?” 👍

These are somewhat contradictory. No microwave in 1946-1971 could have had a microprocessor. If the answer is “sometimes yes, sometimes no” then 🤷‍♂️ is probably best.

In personally trying to use ChatGPT 4 for a job task (programming), I would disagree strongly with this sentiment. I have yet to find a task where it doesn’t partially fail due to no notion of the concepts underlying the topic.

In an example, I asked it to write an implementation of reading from a well known file type as a class. It had many correct ideas for certain operations (compiled from other sources of course), but failed with the basic concept of class instantiation. It was calling class methods in the constructor, which is just not allowed in the language being used. I went through several iterations with it to avail before just giving up on it.

In “normal” language tasks, it seems to be quirky, but passable. But if you give it a highly technical task where nuance and conceptual knowledge are needed? I have yet to see that work in any reliable capacity.

Oh that’s definitely true. I was just surprised to see something similar (especially the avoiding eye contact) in the animal kingdom.

“Contact” for a similar reason. It’s a mix of all motivations, along with people’s general mistrust of each other.