> the team was able to find low-cost solutions for power generation scheduling across a range of grid scenarios, including a model with 26 generators and a full day’s worth of hourly demand.
That does not seem like a massive problem where a quantum computer provides a clear advantage: 26 * 24 = 624 values to optimize over.
Too many dark triad personalities rise to be CEOs. Not surprising at all. Levels of psychopathy are the same in C-suites and prisons, which is about 5x higher than in the general population.
LLMs trained on comments of selfish people who compete for likes and cheap thrills rather than collaborate online appear to behave selfishly. Well, colour me surprised.
> The former manager also believes there is an urgent need for alternative offers for digital payments "that are accepted and give citizens a more secure feeling".
Honest question: have there been actual European citizens who have security concerns about digital payments or is this just politicians yapping about sovereignty? It feels as if it deflects from the real reason but I am willing to plead ignorance here.
AIs can write code in seconds, but you may have years of regret _if_ you believe whatever it spits out without verification. The cold-war maxim "trust, but verify" is truer than ever.
The danger behind usage of LLMs is that managers do not see the diligent work needed to ensure whatever they come up with is correct. They just see a slab of text that is a mixture of reality and confabulation, though mostly the latter, and it looks reasonable enough, so they think it is magic.
Executives who peddle this nonsense don't realize that the proper usage requires a huge amount of patience and careful checking. Not glamorous work, as the author states, but absolutely essential to get good results. Without it, you are just trusting a bullshit artist with whatever that person comes up with.
Seeing as OpenAI & Co were trained on torrented books from similar places, I'm sure that ChatGPT provides an adequate search layer on top of Anna's Archive, though it is not as free from confabulations as one might hope for in a search engine.
A bank is more than an app. You are responsible for people's hard-earned cash, so there is, understandably, a lot of regulation and it differs from country to country.
Speaking as a customer of a bank that thinks it knows me but clearly doesn't, I would not bet on personalization. It sounds great in boardrooms but I would prefer it if my bank app just got out of my face and didn't try so hard to be a lifestyle brand I could not care less about. I also would not trust any automated investment algorithm made by some intern.
That is such a terrible piece. StackOverflow was already in decline before ChatGPT was released. The authors cherry-picked their data to show charts to prove their point.