The only one I’ve heard of working really well was 3D printing copyrighted material that is usually way overpriced. Board game pieces, figurines, etc.

Bullshit

Strangers on the internet are not qualified to answer deeply complex questions like this despite what they might think.

Foreign affairs is something that people dedicate their lives to studying and understanding. I seriously doubt those experts are here answering this question.

Do you notice how all of the answers you’ve received are inconsistent with each other?

I’m sorry but this is actually a stupid question. Not only can nobody here answer it but it’s obviously flame bait.

It depends on the risk involved. The US stock market has returned around 7% annually averaged over a very long period of time. That’s considered the benchmark for investments with significant risk.

The price seems ok. There’s more to consider than price though. Do people dislike them because of the quality of their work?

You’re asking a question that nobody has an answer to.

It’s both unethical and illegal.

Many families have recessive fucked alleles that cause all kinds of problems. An allele is a variant of a gene. You need two copies of a recessive allele for that gene to be expressed (do something).

Every fucked allele the parents share has a 25% chance of being expressed in the child. The more DNA the parents share the more fucked alleles they share. Usually… sometimes the opposite happens and the number of bad alleles is reduced in the child. Inbreeding can lead to fucked animals and “perfect” ones. Weird stuff.

Now you might be thinking “why do families have so many fucked alleles?”

That’s a good question. The thing about carrying a single recessive, fucked allele is that it doesn’t do anything to you. Mutations happen all the time and so these alleles are floating around and multiplying constantly.

It’s only a problem on the odd chance that they get expressed which is most often when family members produce offspring.

So it’s worth noting that this is the type of thing that we can check for these days. In some cultures it’s acceptable to marry a cousin and I’ve heard that they check for any genetic issues before proceeding when they live in a first world country.

You’re certainly not the only software developer worried about this. Many people across many fields are losing sleep thinking that machine learning is coming for their jobs. Realistically automation is going to eliminate the need for a ton of labor in the coming decades and software is included in that.

However, I am quite skeptical that neural nets are going to be reading and writing meaningful code at large scales in the near future. If they did we would have much bigger fish to fry because that’s the type of thing that could very well lead to the singularity.

I think you should spend more time using AI programming tools. That would let you see how primitive they really are in their current state and learn how to leverage them for yourself. It’s reasonable to be concerned that employees will need to use these tools in the near future. That’s because these are new, useful tools and software developers are generally expected to use all tooling that improves their productivity.

Yes! Now I get to continue enjoying the fruits of unpaid labor. Even better I’ll be able to complain about every niche issue I have without ever contributing anything. Woohoo!

401k (employer sponsored) and IRA (individual account) are managed by investment companies. They’re not a state operated asset. It seems unlikely that the government would move it away from these investment companies because they’re probably great a lobbying.

The law states that these retirement accounts should be completely untouched and recoverable if the company goes bankrupt.

Historically the market returns have been around 7% annually over the long long term but that fluctuates a lot and might not even be possible into the future but America is good at pumping those numbers up so idk.

Altering your perception of reality doesn’t need to be centered around escaping challenges.

Interesting, I’ve had the total opposite experience. GPT-4 is reasonable more often than not. I don’t find the “it’s sometimes wrong” argument very compelling because the same is true for 99% of other information sources. I’ve always had to use critical thinking when look for answers online anyway.

You have a brain right? If you ask it for low water pressure shaving tips I think it would be pretty easy to tell if it’s suggesting nonsense.

This has been said in the thread already but I want to try and boil it down a bit. Your question is about intuition vs evidence. Science used to involve a lot more intuition. Many things that the public believed to be true were just educated guesses with little evidence to back them up.

Over time we realized through research that a large number of these reasonable guesses were completely wrong. So now intuition in science has been largely limited to the hypothesis and the hypothesis is mostly worthless without evidence.

We’ve also seen in the modern day just how fucked up human intuition can be. We largely have intuition to thank for: flat earth, anti vax, snake oil, etc.

If I remember correctly the only massless particles that travel through space are photons. Photons are what make up light so to say they travel at that speed is a little redundant.

Maybe. Anybody who says no is forgetting that we still know very little about the universe. It’s possible that we’ll find a way to transmit data to other time periods.

Electrons have mass. It’s tiny but a very important distinction between them and massless particles like photons.

The easiest way to explain divide by zero is to think of division as repeated subtraction. For a simple example of 4 / 2 we know that we would have to subtract 2 from 4 twice to reduce it to 0.

When we divide by zero we’re functionally asking how many times can we remove zero from the numerator until it is reduced to zero. We typically state the answer as infinity or NaN because we know that we could do this operation indefinitely without the numerator reducing to 0.