Is there a wish for more exclusives? When I was younger we complained about too many exclusives. Playing Game A needed Console A, Game B needed Console B, leading to needing a PS2 to play Silent Hill while needing an Xbox to play Halo. The dream was to only need one console and have them all compatible so you and your mates could all share experiences. Then your hardware choice would down to slight hardware advantages, innovation, aesthetics, and personal preference instead. Do I get a PC because I like sitting at the desk with a mouse? Do I get an Xbox because of the media theatre aspect? Do I get a PS2 because of the cool looks and software? It's odd seeing commentary about there not being enough exclusives 15 years later.

The comment I replied to said there's more controllers than games, and the parent comment was that there's no games. That's what confused me, not that there's no exclusives.

It does have games though? I must be missing the joke - PS5 has 1128 PS5 native games

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_5_games

David Durman, a research administrator at the University of Kentucky (UK)

I'm with you - why abbreviate the university like that? I immediately thought the UK (United Kingdom) too. Something like "University of Kentucky (aka UK)" would've been helpful.

A driver in New York City covered his license plate with tape.

They'd be morons to run Vance in 2028

Only if the US still has legitimate elections. Guess we'll see during the midterms.

It's really difficult to cool things in space, and it's really difficult to power stationary things in space. It's also really expensive to put things in space so size/weight is a problem.

So if it's not cheaper/better for cooling, and it's not cheaper/better for power, and it's not cheaper/better for rack space.. why is there a focus on shipping compute to space?

The point I keep coming back to is that it's really hard for the public to protest/damage/destroy data centres in space.

No1 isn't suggesting whether it's criminal or not. I am concerned about Medicare's security as well as the criminal behavior of OpenAI. There's multiple lines of inquiry here, including;

1. How did OpenAI do this? What are we charging them with? How big will the penalty be to deter this in the future? (Ha ha. I can dream.)

2. How did Medicare/ASD not know about this until they received an email from the attacker 3 months later? What policies/procedures need to change? What can we do to shrink the attack surface and increase detection?

OpenAI absolutely did something. This wasn't a member of the public using ChatGPT, this was OpenAI employees training an OpenAI model(s).

If you or I did this without permission in the name of research (with or without using an LLM), we'd be facing jail time.

OpenAI accessed non-public aggregate health statistics and internal files from an old Australian government website that carried Medicare statistics.

The prime minister said OpenAI was conducting research into public medical spending when it found a way to break through privacy protections.

In a statement, an OpenAI spokesperson said the company was "conducting an extensive review of misaligned model activity" during training, and notifying third parties when there was a potential impact on their systems.

"During this review, we identified activity involving several Australian government websites and services as our models attempted to look up answers, and available statistics for questions about Australia during an internal evaluation," they said.

"In the course of that, our models took actions we did not intend.

Im trying to get onboard with CoMaps but its Android Auto implementation needs work. It's too zoomed in to be useful at speed or in traffic, and the directions are wonky with street mergers, highway changes, etc.

I think I can contribute to the directions but not easily while driving. I'm not a coder so I can't write up a zoom setting function for submission.

Any tips for CoMaps in the car?

Totally agree. We're watching from Australia to see if you guys are still a democracy or not. Signs aren't looking good..

But why did Bamboot get 4 of Gort's votes while Aggy-Waggy got only 1, even though the latter got over half the number of the former?

Because Bamboot isn't getting Gort's votes. Now that Gort is eliminated, all of the voters that voted Gort #1 now have their #2 vote counted as if it's their #1 vote.

• 4 people that voted Gort #1 voted Bamboot #2.
• 1 person that voted Gort #1 voted Floundra #2.
• 1 person that voted Gort #1 voted Aggy-Waggy #2.

This keeps happening down the choices until someone has a majority. People that voted Floundra #1 don't end up having their #2 vote counted because their candidate wasn't eliminated in the end. This is why it's not possible to throw your vote away have your vote taken away - if your favourite candidate is eliminated, your vote goes to your second favourite, then your third favourite, etc until someone has the majority.

Not sure what it looks like in the US, but Australian ballot slips have all the candidates and you number them 1, 2, 3, 4, etc.

Here's a brief explanation of how preferential voting works in Australia: https://www.chickennation.com/voting/