I don't have a problem with AI assistance either, but this undermines the point the article is making. For me it is like a priest preaching gay sex is wrong and then being caught in bed with a male prostitute (snorting cocaine optional). Leaves bad taste in the mouth.

Many such cases. Both the priest anecdote, and AI-critical posts being AI-generated.

He writes 2,253 candidates and 2,069 were disqualified. 184 were qualified, so 1 in 12 was considered competent.

With that volume of candidates, I'd be curious as to what they used for screening (AI prob?) and whether it was filtering out good candidates due to dumb filters.

Then he quotes 0.18% to show how rare a quality is, which is a wrong interpretation of the numbers. If he'd said 8% that would be realistic.

The number of actual openings is not given.

Also the number who turned their offers down (and perhaps the number they disqualified due to being overqualified and too expensive).

Ultimately kind of a meaningless metric.

Asking ChatGPT about safety of someone traveling instead of asking that person is the nerdy thing to do. Somehow a hairstylist doesn't invoke image of a nerd in me. That is why I find this story implausible.

Agreed. Lead main source in nature is galena, which is relatively nontoxic. It rarely occurs in metallic form.

It is ok to handle galena if you don't eat with your fingers. But it is highly toxic if swallowed or inhaled.

The fire started on 26th September and news about it reached HN only now. I think this is telling how disruptive for South Korea daily life this accident really was.

Reminds me of one of the stupidest hacks I discovered (In my mind). In one of my previous companies we had many similar Lotus Notes databases and one of them didn't allow to copy text from it. You could paste, I'm sure. You could select the text. But not copy. Turns out you could DRAG the selected text to other window. This copied the text over. So being able to highlight a text may mean you can indeed copy it ;)

This is how to "copy" text from locked google sheets, too.

I'm sceptical a layperson will understand or care what it means that their data will be used in training. If you are concerned about such things this heavily implies you don't want to share your data. Just don't agree to the terms and move on.

Exactly. This is a basic optimization technique and all the dinosaur era databases should have that. But if you build a new database product you have to implement these techniques from scratch. There is no way you shortcut that. Reminds me about CockroachDB and them building a query optimizer[1]. They started with rule based one and then switched to cost based. Feature that older databases already had.

[1] https://www.cockroachlabs.com/blog/building-cost-based-sql-o...

Everything else aside moving to R and Python to escape the USA hegemony means you are still dependend on Python Software Foundation and R Fundation. First is American. Second is based in Vienna, Austria yet still has big American presence among its members. So you end up still dependending on USA. Same with most free and open source. Even if its authors may appear to be European, they may turn out to be Americans (Linus Torvalds) or work for US company anyway (Guido van Rossum)