Because Polymarket creates an incentive to change the real-world result.

If you create a bet on {person} getting assassinated by {date}, you greatly increase the chances of somebody on the "Yes" side thumbing the scales.

Yup. Gambling is already bad but somewhat contained within the walls of a casino or race track.

When you put money on the line for events that are influencable, things get dark fast.

Seemingly harmless sports betting is rife with stories about mob members going to extreme lengths to change the outcome of a sporting event.

It's not hard to see how bad a bet like "so and so won't show up to event x" can go. These don't have to be bets about killing or injuring people to result in people being killed or injured to win a bet.

These companies are a pox on society.

Price isn't affected by mining difficulty, only the other direction.

The only thing "clear" about that License agreement is it contradicts all their other marketing about Copilot.

So either that document is fraudulent or everyone else at Microsoft is committing fraud daily.

Examples from the first search result: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/microsoft-365-copi...

Support page with ~25 tutorials provided by Microsoft about how to "Create a document with Copilot" or "Create a branded presentation from a file" or "Start a Loop workspace from a Teams meeting".

Do you actually believe that creating branded presentations (from Microsoft's own examples) is something people do for "entertainment purposes"?

Did Microsoft force you to follow the tutorials and use CoPilot for business?

By advertising Copilot as capable of doing something they are guaranteeing the product is capable of it.

The way to do enums in SQL (generally, not just MSSQL) is another table. It's better that they don't offer several ways to do the same thing.

Mostly agree separate tables can have multiple attributes besides a text description and can be exposed for modification to the application easily so users or administrators can add and modify codes.

A common extra attribute for a coded value is something for deprecation / soft delete, so that it can be marked as no longer valid for future data but existing data can remain with that code, also date ranges its valid for etc, also parent child code relationships.

Enums would be a good feature but they have a much more limited use case for static values you know ahead of time that will have no other attributes and values cannot be removed even if never used or old data migrated to new values.

Common real world codes like US postal state can take advantage of there being agreed upon codes such as 'NY' and 'New York'.

While I generally would prefer lookup tables, it's much easier to sell dev teams on "it looks and acts like a string - you don't have to change anything."

We've all tried to ask the LLM about something outside of its training data by now.

In that situation, they give the (wrong) answer that sounds the most plausible.

That's definitely been my experience. I work with a lot of weird code bases that have never been public facing and AI has horrible responses for that stuff.

As soon as I tried to make a todomvc it started working great but I wonder how much value that really brings to the table.

It's great for me though. I can finally make a todomvc tailored to my specific needs.

I'm not sure what sorts of weird codebases you're working with but I recently saw Claude programming well on a Lambda MOO -- weirder than that?

I had to Google that haha.

It's in that realm but more complex. I do plan to repeatedly come back and try though. Just so far it hasn't been useful.

Once or twice, for me it's deflected rather than answer at all.

On the other hand, they've also surfaced information (later independently confirmed by myself) that I had not been able to find for years. I don't know what to make of it.

> In that situation, they give the (wrong) answer that sounds the most plausible.

Not if you use web search or deep report, you should not use LLMs as knowledge bases, they are language models - they learn language not information, and are just models not replicas of the training set.

LA is sparse by European standards, or rural by Asian standards.

http://www.demographia.com/db-worldua.pdf CTRL+F for "BUILT-UP URBAN AREAS BY URBAN POPULATION DENSITY: 2025"

America is the exception for population density in general.

There are more options -

Banning advertising targeted at the user rather than the context

Enforcing Do Not Track

Enforcing GDPR (especially sites that use cookie banners)

SO also isn't afraid to tell you that your question is stupid and you should do it a better way.

Some people take that as a personal attack, but it can be more helpful than a detailed response to the wrong question.

The problem is the people who decide which questions are stupid are misaligned with the site's audience.

Amazon paid no dividends, that's their big debt financing.

There's no reason that contextual ads couldn't be automated at scale.

It might even be easier than automating targeted ads, given the incredible level of research and compute that gets wasted on targeting.