"You are right, I made a mistake. Here is a better answer." Continues to give wrong answers.
To be fair, the AI's not wrong. It's probably better, but just a teeny tiny bit so.
Honestly, AI is like a genie - whatever you come up with he'll just butcher and misinterpret so you start questioning both your own sanity and the semantics of language. Good thing these genies have no wish limit, but bad thing that they murder rainforests while generating their non-sequitur replies.
This email makes no sense.
Let me paraphrase them:
We bet on mobile and won big. AI is great. AI tutors are a thing.
Therefore we'll get AI to understand our codebase and get it to fo stuff people did before
This isn't "betting on" AI. This is outsourcing to AI.
You can be an AI company (theoretically) - have people make AI models that are then deployed. Note the lack of recursively, made-by-AI-for-AI products and services.
Tbh, Duolingo was always a gimmick. It doesn't teach you a language. It teaches you small snippets of 5-10 words each with little to no grammar. It's repetitive and boring. It was that way before the lives they said they'd never add.
They lost me as a user when they rolled out lives.
Now, I hope they lose someone else.
Duolingo has potential. But learning a language always required a large time investmant, and it always will.
I assume its lessons will only get worse than they already are.
82% of world imports came from China.
Wow, didn't know the world imported stuff (China wasn't part of it).
Ever heard of the world global?
is not a king
Even if be were called "King" rather than "President", the Constitution is still a thing. He can call himself whatever, really.
Funny thing is, many citizens of the US seem to have less rights and priviledges than subjects of the UK.
Just as there is no for cops murdering pretty much anyone for anything on the clock. "Standing your ground" to these bastards is plain playing with fire. If you're not perfectly white and very lucky, you'll be just signing your own death warrant.
the page will immediately get blocked because it tried to load a result from Reddit or coursehero or something
Does that mean any search (AI insight notwithstanding) will get blocked if it includes a Reddit, Coursera or something on the blocklist result at all?
Because if yes, that's much more than just asinine. It's basically blocking entire search topics due to the sheer fact that Reddit will appear on the furst page of Google a lot.
Oh, look! A challenge. And a business opportunity! Just get a mortgage, buy some land in the middle of nowhere and make a reverse hydro plant.
Oh, I forgot. Banks don't loan money for stuff not already existing or net-harmful hyped-up bullshit like AI and crypto.
I'd say putting up cameras violates the person's dignity, but knowing how hellish these places can end up I'm not surprised well-meaning people have to do that to protect their loved ones.
Linux definitely has a learning curve but
I'd like to interject here a bit.
For a "normal" user (read non-tech, perhaps even a bit lower on the "tech literacy" scale) any change requires a learning curve. While we Linux people don't have too big of a problem switching distros and UI setups, someone "non-techy" finds the switch from Win7 to Win10 challenging, as well as from Win10 to Win11. We're not in the 95/98 era when a "name" upgrade meant you don't have to install USB drivers off a floppy - the UI stad the same. (which just means Greg won't need to bother with that while he sets up your new computer)
Nowadays, the move from 10 to 11 is anything but "painless" to me - and for me it's just annoyances. For people less tech-savvy it's an enigma at times.
So, my point is - the switch from Win10 to Win11 will probably be worse than Win10 to Mint for old people (mostly). Those deeply rooted into varous ecosystems aren't the focus of this comment.
Is it just me, or do the two thugs look way too much like thugs?
IANAL. Also IDKWYL (I don't know wher you live), but in the sane Western world (the EU), there's no need for a notice in your case - usually it's a good idea to check with the landlords/tenants wether they plan on renewing the lease or not so you both know where the other side is standing.
And, of course, since the contract is time-bound, the assumption is that both possibilities (renewal and no renewal) are on the table, and neither require any side to go out of their way to announce their intent on what happens after the contract expires.
The 'default' option is no renewal - otherwise there is no meaning in making it time-bound and burdening the parties with the need to re-establish a new agreement each contract term. So the need to give a notice of "I plan to do xy after the contract" makes no sense, let alone it carrying contractual punishments.
You weren't required to give a notice. Even if the contract stated so, that clause would most likely get nullified, which I sincerely doubt (again, in most of Europe), since it disproportionally and predatorily benefits one party.
And again, IANAL. You should get one.
But, were I your lawyer (which I most definitely am not), I would scold you for writing the notice in the firdt place since it puts you in a submissive position (your landlord can now claim that by giving notice you "showed" that you "think" you "owe" the landlord notice, ergo you owe them money for the 2 days in May (assuming a 30-day notice), which they conveniently round up to an entire month. I sincerely hope you didn't include explicit (and unnecessary) wording along the lines of THIS IS A 30-DAY NOTICE AS PER $WHATEVER ANNOUNCING OUR INTENTION TO MOVE OUT BY DATE.
Of course, this statement makes no sense. The contract meets its natural end by the date given and that's it. No notices, no payments, no apartment rented out. A renewal requires the good-will of both parties.
My IANAL advice for you going forward is: Stick to the German philosophy - keep things as brief as possible to give the "enemy" less ammo on the one, and to deal with any edge-cases that don't go in your favour.
It's a delicate balance. A fine art, even - the art of writing contracts. And it's hard.
A good contract leaves no room for large gaps in interpretation (loopholes), but allows some flexibility. It also keeps the parties on equal footing (neither subjegated to the others) is in itself a work of fine art.
Bad contracts are (or should be) treated as insults. Shuld the insult be bad enough, ripping the piece of paper conveying the contract out of protest. (Remember - the contract is not the piece of paper, but the words on it and an oral agreement is just as valid as a written contract, but harder to prove - sometimes the legislature decides to nullify all oral contracts for specific "high-impact" things like home sale, but that's another can of worms).
Going forward, do not be afraid to reject contracts and call for a middle ground (suggest amendments) which protect your rights and interests. Not doing it is a terrible idea - the only thing you have to "lose" in such a case is all the obligations that weigh you down from the bad contract.
Germans would actually, I assure you, find it insulting if you just accepted the initial proposal of a contract if it isn't a fixed template given by the Minstries (in that case not amending is acceptable since they strike a good balance, but amending is by no means impossible - these templates are, after all, mere suggestions meant to be acceptable for the majority of uses/circumstances).
And no such century lasted for a century either.