It's clear you don't really understand the wider context and how historically hard these tasks have been. I've been doing this for a decade and the fact that these foundational models can be pretrained on unrelated things then jump that generalization gap so easily (within reason) is amazing. You just see the end result of corporate uses in the news, but this technology is used in every aspect of science and life in general (source: I do this for many important applications).

That clarifies it, thanks

They print it out when someone places an order! Welcome to the 21st century. We have this thing called the internet so people can share information without killing trees. It's the resource material for a college course. That's like the definition of a text book without costing the students a month's rent. random people. One is a PhD teaching a college course on the subject, the other is Wolfram. Neither of those are "random people" and I'm willing to bet their credentials beat "claims to be a high school math teacher" pretty soundly. I already pointed out to you that they DON'T teach order of operations at University. It's taught in high school. Dude on page you referred to was teaching Set theory, not order of operations. This portion of the discussion wasn't about order of operations, it was about the number of inputs an operator (+, and - in this case) has. Try to keep up. Don't know who you're referring to. I'm a high school Maths teacher, hence the dozens of textbooks on the topic. Dear God if that's true I feel sorry for your students and embarrassed for whatever school is paying you. But this is the internet and with any luck that's a flat out lie. At least your repeated use of the plural maths means you're not anywhere near my kids. And yet the textbook says nothing of the kind. If I had 2+3, which is really +2+3.. Oh, I see the problem. We're back to reading comprehension. That section you highlighted specifically refers to when those symbols are being used as a "sign of the quality" of the number it's referring to, not when it's being used to indicate an operation like addition or subtraction. Hopefully that clears it up. This is ignoring the fact that a random screen shot could be anything. For all I know you wrote that yourself. do I, according to you, have to write 0+2+0+3 No. You also don't need to write +2+3 because the first "+" isn't an operator. It's, as your own picture says, a sign of the quality of 2. Now you're getting it. Multiply and divide take 2 inputs, add and subtract take 1. I would love to know how you get to a sum or difference with only one input. Here, I'll try to spell it out using your own example so that even you can understand. The inputs to 2 + 3 = 5 are 2 and 3. Let's count them together. 2 is the first, and 3 is the second. 1, 2. Two inputs for addition. Did you get it this time? Was that too fast? You can go back and read it again if you need to Actually none of those are operators. The first 2 are grouping symbols Fine, operation then. The fact that you think "!" is the same thing as brackets doesn't do anything to help your bona fides. And I don't have the energy to write up a word doc and screen shot it since that's apparently what it takes for you to consider something valid. Maybe you're just being weirdly pedantic about operator vs operation. Which would be a strange hill to die on since the original topic was operations. You very nearly got it that time though! If by "it" you mean through your thick skull, then you're more optimistic than I am. Again, it's not me who's wrong. Again, it is. I could keep providing sources, but I still don't have the time to screen shot some random crap with no supporting evidence.

Tokyo banned diesel motors in the late 90s. As far as I know that didn't kill Toyota. At the same time European car makers started to lobby for particle filters that were supposed to solve everything. The politics who where naive enough to believe them do share responsibility, but not as much as the european auto industry that created this whole situation. Also, you implies that laws are made by politicians without any intervention of the industries whatsoever. I think you know that it is not how it works.

We have to do this ourselves in the government for every decommissioned server/appliance/end user device. We have to fill out paperwork for every single storage drive we destroy, and we can only destroy them using approved destruction tools (e.g. specific degaussers, drive shredders/crushers, etc). Appliances can be kind of a pain, though. It can be tricky sometimes finding all the writable memory in things like switches and routers. But, nothing is worse than storage arrays... destroying hundreds of drives is incredibly tedious.

Eh, I kinda like the ephemeral nature of most tiktoks, having things go viral within a group of like 10,000 people, to the extent that if you're tangentially connected to the group, you and everyone you know has seen it, but nobody outside that group ever sees and it vanishes into the ether like a month later makes it a little more personal.