Maybe one starting point is the 2 tones of CO₂ estimated to be the annual budget per person to stay at 1.5°C of global warming (already passed). For people living in rich countries, staying under the 2t requires active efforts, it’s possible since developing countries do it, but they are often considered too much of a hassle by the average rich country person: little to no individual car, little to no plane, home energy performance investments, smaller home, less animal food, shopping local etc.

As far as I understand, for the basic needs, it’s totally possible to sustain the demographic peak that should be around 10 billion humans in 2100. But certainly not with the current level of resources consumption in rich countries.

See also the 8 other planetary boundaries that we would need to respect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_boundaries

climate change, ocean acidification, stratospheric ozone depletion, biogeochemical flows in the nitrogen cycle, excess global freshwater use, land system change, the erosion of biosphere integrity, chemical pollution, and atmospheric aerosol loading.

My current team is using 120 too and honestly I don’t like it. 88 is great when you work with split screen and I do that a lot. Short lines are easier to read than wrapped lines for my brain.

My development policy is to use black.

Resistance networks who hid and smuggled targets out of reach at the very least.

Average with a touch of randomness and hallucinations! Don’t forget the best bits.

Does that mean I will have more choice in which surveillance agency I want to be spied by?

I will never go on a second date for the life of me.

I heard eels love neck kisses.

I have had enough of these dates costing a kidney every time.

But it also doesn’t need to be as exact as SQL, which removes some kind of complexity.

It would not be a fully determining schema that could apply to random outputs, I would guess this is impossible for natural language, and if it is possible, then it may as well be used for procedural generation. It would be just enough to make an LLM output be good enough. It doesn’t need to be perfect because human output is not perfect either.

You seem to imply we can only use the raw output of the LLm but that’s not true. We can add some deterministic safeguards afterwards to reduce hallucinations and increase relevancy. For example if you use an LLM to generate SQL, you can verify that the answer respects the data schemas and the relationship graph. That’s a pretty hot subject right now, I don’t see why it couldn’t be done for video game dialogues.
Indeed, I also agree that the consumption of resources it requires may not be worth the output.

I am using them as a side tool for development. I think LLMs are already very performent for web knowledge search (e.g. replacing a search on stackoverflow), suggestions, explanations and error detection. Although is it worth the resources consumption? Not sure, but I can’t afford not staying on top of the tooling available for my job. However, I agree, in my experience, the edit/agent modes are not efficient for coding, for now.

Generating secondary dialogues for a video game is quite a lower quality requirement than software engineering. So I think it could work there. It requires sounding natural, not being exact, LLMs are good at this.

I think it could work to give dynamic and varied answers to secondary characters given good prompts and other guardrails to preserve the immersion. As long as the core elements of the games are not AI generated slope, and developers are honest about where it was used.

I think that’s a nashi, a Japanese pear.

My cousin in Darwin, OP also means original post, I got the joke. The comment was about the science behind, so that’s what I replied about.

It’s not clear apparently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_DNA.
Although OP seems to confuse non-coding DNA (the ~98%) and junk DNA. Some non-coding DNA has clearly identified roles, so it should be well below 98% of junk, and there’s a lot left to explore.

Shucks, I thought the blood coming out would magically irrigate every bank account and solve all unfairness.

¡Hazlo!

The crown of impératrice Eugénie (Napoléon III), on the first picture, was actually abandonned during their escape and it was found damaged.

I heard some former policeman specialized in heists saying that it seems the team was half experiences half newbies. The entrance was perfect but the escape was a mess. They left the crown but also all sorts of objects like jackets and blankets that the police will be able to analyze.

Also, these jewels are so famous that it will be hard to resell or display anywhere, so they would have to sell them stone by stone for a fraction of the price of the whole. So it’s hard to understand the motive.