100% this. Self deception is so easy and if you lack even a basic understanding of how things operate, it is essentially magic. And at that point, it’s not too big of a logical jump.

Not disagreeing with you as I have the same initial reaction. Just pointing out that I can see a path where you could easily rationalize away your concerns because it can be convincing. Especially when people train themselves (internal prompt engineering) to stay within its guard rails to keep it acting in a manner consistent with what they expect. Clearly they have some issues in their lives as they aren’t acting rationally.

My hypothetical was not a close comparison but was an attempt to find a situation where I myself would have an emotional attachment (although maybe not to this level). I could foresee a situation where a complex LLM (again, oversimplified) was tuned and loaded into some robot or device. If I interacted with a daily basis over a period of time, I might get attached to it, and if it talked back, again, it might be comforting or refreshing to talk to something that we have designed to be as useful and helpful as possible.

Is it though? Yes, I think it’s silly to have an emotional connection to what is essentially an intensely complex algorithm but then I remember tearing up after watching Wall-E for the first time. R2-D2, The iron giant, Number 5 from short circuit. Media has prepared us for this eventuality I feel. Stick a complex AI model in a robot, give it 20 years of life experience data, day in and day out interactions/training, I could totally see how we could trick our own minds into having emotional connections to objects.

My exact thought when they selectively removed language from the constitution on a federal website. Pollute the primary sources and the AI models will follow.

I’m honestly looking for an answer for my specific use case and unfortunately no other browser seems to be able to do this (I last looked into this in earnest near the beginning of the year). I am a consultant and work on multiple customers systems (web based system) all of which use a common single sign in provider. Unfortunately this means that in a single browser session, I can only be logged into one customer at one time. Yes, I know I can use multiple browsers but I sometimes touch 10 different systems in a day and need to switch between them easily and quicly. Yes, I know I can do this in Firefox but Firefox doesn’t break each sandboxed session into it’s own container with its own customized icon in the taskbar within windows.

With chrome I can create as many local profiles as I want, one for each of my customers and each with their own unique icons. Each profile has its own add-ons, caches etc. and I can quickly switch back and forth between them visually from the taskbar.

I do not want to continue having to using Chrome so if someone has a solution that gives me chrome profiles without the google, I would love that so much.

You all have no idea the idiocy of their naming and the confusion it causes with their business software: Microsoft Dynamics - This is an array of business software. Some of it is the same core platform with different features but many of the applications are acquisitions and run on different back-end platforms.

Microsoft Dynamics CRM (Customer relationship Management). They originally named their software to be the name of what it actually does. Not a bad idea so when people searched for that name, results would point to their software eventually. This is their Salesforce competitor.

After building market and name recognition and gaining market space, they renamed it to Dynamics Customer Engagement (CE). Then soon after split the product into modules or sub-products and called them: Dynamics 365 Sales, Dynamics 365 Customer Service, Dynamics 365 Field Service (which was a module acquired by Microsoft but was originally called field one sky), Dynamics 365 Project Operations (which was originally called Project Service Automation).

They had MDM (Microsoft Dynamics Marketing) which was an email marketing platform. This MDM is not to be confused with MDM (Mobile data management) but was actually just the first iteration of their marketing tool. They re-wrote it from scratch and called it “Dynamics Marketing”. They then re-wrote it a third time (they are in the process of finishing the re-write) and it is now called “Microsoft Dynamics Customer Insights and Journey’s”. A name that just rolls right off the tongue.

Accounting Software Microsoft GP - This was a Microsoft software acquisition of accounting software called “GP”. Microsoft has been the steward of this project for a very long time but it is currently being phased out and is in end-of-life. Microsoft SL - Another acquisition. Accounting software called Solomon. Microsoft still sells and support this software. It serves a particular niche. Microsoft F&BO - This is a complicated one so I am just going to map out the names of what it was and what it has become but this is Microsoft’s SAP/Oracle competitor for large organizations: Axapta -> Dynamics AX -> Dynamics Finance and Operations (F&O) -> Dynamics Finance and Operations and Supply Chain -> Dynamics Finance and Business Operations (F&BO) Microsoft BC - Microsoft Business Central was originally acquired by Microsoft as “Navision”. They renamed it Microsoft NAV and more recently re-wrote and re-named it to Microsoft Business Central (BC).

Long post but they really just suck at names and rename things constantly. From the business side, I think it’s intentional as it causes people to re-evaluate the software without any baggage from the name.

I too, am curious. I could totally be on board with this comment, or I could totally not be on board with this comment. I do agree with the latter sentiment. There are some very creative and well thought-out systems out there.

I’ll preface this by saying I didn’t read the article, nor did I read any of the studies and underlying methodology so it has probably been addressed and corrected for but like a few of the other commentors have mentioned, by measuring it based upon consumption of a single item, it would be hard to see if it really just showed an indicator of overall consumption as opposed to a singular food being the cause.

Lets say one of our sample respondents consume 350g of red meat on average in a week and that consisted of approximately 10% of their diet (by weight). Compare that to a person who had 350g of red meat on average in a week and it consisted of approximately 5% of their diet (by weight). This would be an Extreme example but the second person is literally consuming twice the amount of food (by mass).

Because the audience is not his future co-workers, it’s the managers and hiring staff who have problems that they need solved and are aware of the existing limitations that they have within the team.