Yeah 0- 49% is an F 50-59 is a D 60-69 is a C 70-79 is a B 80-89 is an A 90-100 is an A+
It means that 10-20% of exams and assignments can be used to really challenge students without unfairly affecting grades of those who meet curriculum expectations.
If you miss key information the summary is useless.
If the structure of the code is bad then using that boilerplate will harm your ability to maintain the code FOREVER.
There are use cases for it, but it has to be used by someone who understands the task and knows the outcome they’re looking for. It can’t replace any measure of skill just yet, but it behaves as if it can which is hazardous.
47% is a fail. 81% is an A-… Sure the AI can fail faster than a human can succeed, but I can fail to run a marathon faster than an athlete can succeed.
I guess by the standards we use to judge AI I’m a marathon runner!
Not even that complex anymore, just download brave and “open private window with tor”. Then go to the website and download the data.
Downloading a “tor browser” always sound more “hacker” than it is these days.
Yeah they make a good point, you reply with reactionary bullshit, they show you that your concerns are illegitimate through simple counterexamples, you realise you’re outmatched and quit. Did I miss a step?
Fully hinged response
Stop signs and traffic lights are a car concept. Pedestrians don’t need them and have NEVER needed them because they move slow and can see all around them without blind spots. Cyclists are a lot closer to pedestrians than to cars unless you’re in an ebike with no governor. Ride on man!
Oh yeah. There should be one, because the relationship is perfectly symmetrical. See, sometimes cars hit bikes and murder the bikers, and sometimes a bike will be a minor inconvenience to a driver. Also cars have completely stolen roads from pedestrians in the last 70 years and sometimes bikes take a small portion back. Good point, I’m sure it’ll be a great community! Very healthy!
Prison system? who needs that when you have millions of fanboys willing to pay for the privilege of trying the latest Musk genius-tech-definitely-not-hare-brained-bullshit™
I completely agree. This is going to free kids from someone taking a picture of them doing something relatively harmless and extorting them. “That was AI, I wasn’t even at that party 🤷”
I can’t wait for childhood and teenage life to being a bit more free and a bit less constantly recorded.
Nobody is giving away i9 hardware at i3 prices otherwise everyone would buy the cheapest model and part it out for massive profit.
Look at some n95 NUCs on Amazon, or any mini pc really. Often less than 200$ for a full windows PC that can stream anything you throw at it.
Space x doesn’t work thanks to Musk. It works DESPITE him, and it requires careful management.
AI isn’t “like a person” it doesn’t “learn like a person” it doesn’t “think like a person” it’s nothing like a person. It’s a a machine that creates copies of whatever you put into it. It’s a machine that a real person, or group of people, own. These people TAKE all the stuff everyone else created and put it into their copy machine.
In fact it’s really easy to show that it’s a copy machine because the less stuff you put into it the more of a direct copy you get out of it. If you put only one song, or one artist, into it then virtually everything it creates would be direct copyright infringements. If you put all of the worlds music into it the copying becomes more blurred, more complex, more interesting, and therefore more valuable.
Sure AI is a great innovation, but if someone wants to put my work into a copying machine they’re going to have to acquire it from me legally.
No one is against AI, we’re just against the people who own the AI machines stealing our work without paying for it.
More people were killed in the firebombing.
The theory that more people would have died of the nukes weren’t dropped is FAR from settled fact. The Japanese were already looking to surrender and it’s not likely the bomb played a big part in that decision.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki?wprov=sfla1
Regardless it’s nothing to get banned over, that’s for sure.
Oh, there are a lot of Tesla/self driving cars fanboys out here. They’re caught up in the idea that these corporations will save us from traffic congestion/paying taxes for public transit/car accidents/climate change/car ownership/ you name it and self driving cars will solve it. They don’t tend to like it when you try to bring reality to their fantasy.
Self driving cars are a really cool technology. Electric cars as well. However, they don’t solve the fundamental problem of transporting a 200lb person using a 3000lb vehicle. So they’re at best a partial solution. I also don’t really want a future where corporations own more of our stuff and force into monthly payments for heated car seats and “prioritise human life” premium options.
Fanboys gonna fanboy I guess!
Nah, I think most people would crash into a tree rather than clear a sidewalk. Cars are designed to protect you in a crash. Pedestrians don’t have seatbelts, crash zones, and airbags.
No. I don’t think this is a good solution. Companies will put a price on your life and focus on monetary damage reduction. If you’re about to cause more property damage than your life is worth (to Mercedes) they’ll be incentivized to crash the car and kill you rather than crash into the expensive structure.
Your car should be you property, you should be liable for the damage it causes. The car should prioritise your life over monetary damage. If there is some software problem causing the cars to crash, you need to be able to sue Mercedes through a class action lawsuit to recover your losses.
I think it’s desktop only, but I rarely use the mobile brave app.