In my experience, IRL conversations are generally more nuanced. I rarely encounter people who are adamant about one stance or another in any kind of absolute terms. But online, you’ll often find people on the extremes, saying that anything AI is good/bad no matter what and getting mad at anyone that doesn’t share the same opinion. And those extremes are often the loudest voices.
I’ve done a bit of work on this front a few years ago. We had a number of simulators that can tell you the likelihood that something binds to a specific protein, and you’re basically just searching through all possible compounds to find things that bind to a target while minimizing their interactions with other proteins that would be known to cause problems in the human body. When we find promising candidates, we send them off to a lab to synthesize and test in vitro.
This kind of search problem isn’t exactly easy to automate mainly because naive solutions are very expensive. It’s never been a problem of outputting nonsense. The automations use the same evaluation metrics as human researchers.
As long as you don’t reinvent the protocol
That would make sense if you were an actual athlete looking to compete in the Olympics, but that’s not the situation that OP is in.
If a website loads with a VPN, then it doesn’t exist?
or
If a website loads without a VPN, then it doesn’t exist?
And what’s that difference? Both will get you into a discussion on the merits of the other country’s system and the proposed solution.
There are many things here in Canada that suck. Is it better or worse than that of other countries? Should we try to copy what someone else is doing or come up with a different solution altogether? The way to figure that out is to critically evaluate what’s going on elsewhere, and that comes with engaging in discussions with others on those topics, which can come in the form of criticisms. We may also want to convince others that the state of things in those countries are bad and we should not try to model them, and that also often comes in the form of criticism for that foreign country.
My main machine still runs Linux off a HDD and it’s doing perfectly fine.
It depends on how relevant I expect those changes to be to me. For programming languages or libraries I use often for example, I’ll always read change logs. For other software, I’ll likely only look at it if I’m waiting for a specific bug fix or feature.
Not particularly.
If you consider your example, you may have worked hard for it, but another person could’ve worked equally hard at all the right things and never have gotten the opportunity to even attempt getting into university. We might call that luck. Someone else might call it God’s doing. Regardless, it’s just a different name for the same thing.
We don’t have enough structured data in this domain to be able to use anything other than LLMs. At least, not in the timeframe of OP’s hypothetical.
When is freedom of speech ever not equivalent to freedom of consequences from said speech?
OP is asking how to solve a problem. You understand that repeating the problem does not answer the question, right?
I don’t understand where this question is coming from. The premise of this question is that “literally” is ambiguous. That its meaning is unclear. How does an ambiguous word add clarity to a sentence?
Obviously, you use the word that expresses what you intend to express. The question is what that word would be when you want to express “literally” in the strict dictionary definition sense without ambiguity.
You know of a word that satisfies OP’s criteria and you’re not going to share it?
And we’re constantly doing this. If a word is used a lot and the word is long, we’re going to shorten it.
That will last the average adult about 20 days, and you’ll probably be constantly feeling hungry during that time. Adding a sack of dry beans would make a huge difference.
Vitamins degrade over time. You’ll want to make sure that what you get will actually last for the period of time when you intend to use them.
I don’t think I saw anything in the article about trans women specifically.