I’ve been saying this for almost a decade now, but if I wrote a book with someone like this guy as the biblical antichrist people would say it was way too on the nose.

Low and middle-income countries in Asia face significant disparities in scientific capacity and ability to influence public policy, which is likely to affect responses to future pandemics, climate change and technological advancements such as Artificial Intelligence, according to the International Network for Government Science Advice (INGSA).

I originally read the title as “it is more difficult to influence public policy in least-developed countries based on this study” but it appears it’s actually “it is more difficult for scientists to advocate for science-backed policies in least-developed countries.”

So…their takeaway was that the value of the data is worth the awful publicity?

I keep forgetting that that’s an option

As you can see, they never will. You must seize the wig.

Well it worked the first time around…

I’m most interested in the Dinosaur Quiz.

This is similar to something I assumed right before I had a long argument with a high school physics teacher. We ended up agreeing that he just didn’t really care.

Seems like a good thing to massively protest.

The problem with hearing when a note isn’t right is that by the time you hear it you’ve already played it…

As someone who could never get used to just kinda eyeballing where a note is supposed to be, I strongly disagree about the trombone.

It’s embarrassingly cheap to buy a member of the US Supreme Court.

To quote Ron White “It’s not that the wind’s blowin’, it’s hwhat the wind’s blowin’”

Why would I unload my emotional baggage on the people who caused it in the first place? That just sounds like more baggage.

Edit: This was supposed to be a joke. You can stop pointing out my complex trauma, thank you.

My favorite that trips people up is “nine times out of a hundred”

Well now how am I supposed to enjoy the sensation of someone else’s sweaty hand sliding down the pole to slowly touch mine while they remain oblivious of the entire situation?

It makes sense if you assume it’s actually targeted at managers who want their employees to be in three meetings at once.

GPT-2 came out a little more than 5 years ago, it answered 0% of questions accurately and couldn’t string a sentence together.

GPT-3 came out a little less than 4 years ago and was kind of a neat party trick, but I’m pretty sure answered ~0% of programming questions correctly.

GPT-4 came out a little less than 2 years ago and can answer 48% of programming questions accurately.

I’m not talking about mortality, or creativity, or good/bad for humanity, but if you don’t see a trajectory here, I don’t know what to tell you.

It’s an important lesson for this generation of graduates: robots aren’t ready to take your jobs…but we’re pushing it through anyway.

“very often” is hyperbole, but if you’ve never had/heard of that discussion I would be surprised. But I don’t think “men are misunderstanding the question” is a crazy take.

“who would win in a fight” and “who would you feel more threatened by” are by no means two “random” subjects, they are very closely related in theme and in most situations the answers would be interchangeable. And the conflation of the two closely related topics of conversation was my entire point.