yes, that’s a fair point.

but in my opinion, a narrow example.

let’s say with cars marketed as “FSR”, people would believe it is full self-driving. because it is marketed as such. the exact words are there. is it entirely the consumer’s fault?

nowadays, FSR got silently tagged with “(supervised)”.

…suggesting the developers who instruct agents would be the ones liable ‌for harm.

this looks like too broad of a law to enforce and will most likely hit the lowest hanging fruit if they ever wanted a scapegoat.

it could be an apples-to-oranges comparison. not sure if that intel core can be inside apple phones.

i don’t think that applies at all.

if you have no idea what you’re doing, you’re surely going to think all the churned out stuff is good.

it’s like gambling. you hope it churns out good stuff – and some of the time, it does! lucky!

then you try your luck again. and again with small “fixes”. and again.

Finally some news about the first human trial.

The part about them not issuing regular progress reports since day 1 (a month or so ago) is, how these doctors put it, concerning.

Apart from that, I think jumping from monkeys to human experiments when the success rate is low feels either rush work or some high person in charge decided to go all-or-nothing.