That seems like a problem orders of magnitude harder than making a humanoid robot. We haven't even figured out how to make hamburgers without cows at a marketable price yet.
> We haven't even figured out how to make hamburgers without cows
Isn't that OP's point? Engineering muscle and sinew is harder than coming up with the control software. The cheapest way to a robot thus emerges as just taking the natural stuff and adding an artificial brain to it versus trying to re-engineer the bones and muscles with metal and plastic.
Maybe he or his lawyers thought he would fare better with a judge? Hard to say. I've heard that there are a lot fewer jury trial in Canada vs US but I'm not sure why.
I imagine that the perception might be that a judge will approach the case more rationally and technically, whereas the jury might be swayed by sympathy for the victim, biases, etc. To what extent that's true I do not know, but conviction rates are significantly lower in Canada than in the U.S.
The safety ratios listed in reference [1] are exaggerated, as can be determined by the following qualification: "The majority of published reports of acute lethal toxicity indicate that the decedent used a co-intoxicant (most often alcohol)."
The vast majority of so-called drug overdoses are due to polydrug intoxication. It's much harder to die by consuming a single substance. This is clear from the statistics of the few jurisdictions that report all substances in the blood in coroner's reports. See, for example, the Scottish data from 2020 (https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/34642/7/ndrdd_report.pdf ): "In 2020, almost all (96%) [drug-related deaths] occurred after the consumption of multiple substances."
I imagine painkillers are fairly commonly used for hangover headaches, and it’s surprisingly difficult to get guidance on how long after drinking it’s ok to take painkillers (presumably as it’s complicated) - perhaps instructions should be updated to not just say don’t take with alcohol, but don’t take within a day of alcohol?
If an LLM is used in the drafting of an article, this should, at least, be disclosed, preferably at the beginning of the article. For example, I recently came across this article ( https://thedispatch.com/article/affordability-crisis-healthc... ). The LLM voice was suppressed well enough until this inane passage:
"One number. Four completely different stories. The number is engineered to include all of them, because including all of them is what produces the 49 percent."
I decided to fact-check a statement ("CNN’s May 2026 survey found the share of Americans spontaneously naming gas prices as their top economic problem rose from 5 percent to 23 percent in a single year, with food costs cited almost as often") and it was incorrect (food costs were in fact cited more often than gas prices). Since the first thing I checked was wrong, I decided it wasn't worth my time reading the rest of the article. It was, as they say these days, slop.
It felt like a little bit of my time had been stolen. If a disclosure had been at the top, it would have been more of a caveat emptor situation.
It shocks me that we use to go to wave pools like these for elementary school trips. They never even asked us if we could swim or not. I was at least a passable swimmer, but even so, it was so crowded that I remember a couple times getting stuck under the water briefly trying to find my way up between all the feet and inner tubes.
I don't know why they think this is okay, any more than it would be to call their models "AI doctors" or "AI lawyers".
Ironically, where I live, most actual medicinal chemists are not allowed to call themselves chemists since you have to pay dues to a professional association to use that title.
This stuff drives me nuts. Chrome on desktop is another abhorrent example of this. Every time I log in to a Google account within the browser, it nags me to link the account to the browser itself. One time my partner clicked the popup that asks to link the account by accident (this is very easy to do and probably Google's intention) and it hijacked all of my bookmarks. When I logged out of the account, everything was gone. I looked into Firefox and Edge, but they have the same profile crap. I don't need or want to log in to my browser!
I've hit my limit with Microsoft, too. I'm going to start moving my PCs over to Linux. The last time I installed Linux on a personal device was in high school, almost two decades ago, and it took quite a bit of work to get everything running properly. I've heard that compatibility issues are much less prevalent now. If things to smoothly, I may even convert my main gaming and work PC, although I'll have to look more thoroughly into whether all my Steam games will be playable.
> Chrome on desktop is another abhorrent example of this.
Consider Chromium (the open source build) instead of Chrome when you migrate to Linux. It is in the main repo of most distributions. Chrome is literally spyware. Also Firefox (with the real uBlock Origin, not the watered down version for Chrome/Chromium) is excellent.
Out of curiosity, I pasted an article in French I was reading a few minutes before coming across this thread into ChatGPT and asked for a translation into English. It was certainly passable from a functional perspective, and I wouldn't hesitate to use it to translate an article from a language I don't understand. But it was not professional-quality work. There were a couple instances where the French grammar was mistranslated, and the writing was perfunctory, not going into any effort to have the article flow like it was originally written in English instead of simply translating each sentence literally. Would I read an article written like this? A short one. A novel? Definitely not.
I think the issue is that a lot of professional work is being done when the commissioner would be perfectly fine with non professional work. There will always be a place for artful translation, theres a place for hasty translation as well.
reply