skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Humans can not add any two numbers because of eventual mistake, which makes the second definition trivially useless in regards to comparing human intelligence vs AI.
ChatGPT is not a search engine or a knowledge base. It’s a hallucinating oracle.

Great at content summaries though.
There have always been scammers and charlatans, they just have global reach now, plus there is a disconnect between the creator and the ad system now.

Your average YouTube creator doesn't want scam ads. If the FTC forced YouTube to say "this ad is endorsed by us and we'll pay any legal damages if this is found to be a scam in court", those ads would disappear.

The bigger issue is why this is just a thread on Hacker News and not a major talking point for politicians looking to dunk on Big Tech.
Bots can click through like any other visitors. They won't buy stuff, though, so if you're placing ads for people to directly take an expensive action ("performance advertising") you're mostly ok. Brand advertising, though, is very dependent on fraud detection because it doesn't have this clear connection.

There's more about this near the end of the post.
There's no connection. Where did you see that there was one?
First, all of physics is computable to arbitrary precision. Continuous quantities in physics are being systematically removed because they almost inevitably introduce absurdities [1]. Measures lose all meaning below Planck length anyway.

Second, the point of enumerating all Turing machines is not to run them to completion, it's simply to create them, so your objection is inapplicable. The Turing machine itself defines an ontology. The claim was that algorithms do not have access to novel ontologies, which conflicts with the basic construction of recursively enumerable functions that defines computation.

Third, even if it were true that geometry is not computable, don't mistake the formalism we currently use as somehow necessary. Geometry is powerful enough to model physics, but it could also be too powerful, ie. there could be some formalism less powerful than geometry that would also suffice for physics. For instance, we use real numbers in physics for convenience, but real numbers almost certainly don't really exist as we define them.

[1] Baez's, Struggles with the Continuum, https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.01421
> It's directly tied to the $1B/yr in additional interest payments being incurred by the debt used to finance the acquisition. Twitter pre-Elon was profitable. Twitter post-Elon is bleeding cash.

I think the loss of advertising revenue since (and because of) the deal is much bigger than the interest expense.
When was the last time the government enacted anti-trust laws against a large company?