I don't understand how that is weird. For some reason people have entered this point of view that if you dislike someone you suddenly need to dislike everything they do.

It's perfectly normal for a party you dislike to do something you like and also perfectly normal for a party you like to do something you dislike.

That sounds like weasel words. "without me even specifically asking the bot to take her clothes off."

What did they ask? If they asked for sexy, revealing pictures or something in that direction I think Grok delivered what was asked.

He turned on spicy mode, which was the NSFW image generator. As far as I can tell, it's back to producing "spicy" pics but won't produce genitals/actual nudity, what the user was describing seems to have been a now-patched bug where it was generating actual nudity in spicy mode

I don't think it is. Something can either be correlated and causal or correlated and non-causal. It makes sense to talk about which.

These differences are so extreme that there must be something going on.

Is this something I can do to myself? Is there some kind of video tutorial to see what I really need to do?

You absolutely can! Look up "lymphatic face drainage" on YouTube, there are lots of tutorials. You can do it with just your hands or a jade gua sha tool.

I wonder if anyone has ever done a study to see if there is a correlation between daily wet facial shaving with soap and Alzheimer's? A wet shave would be a short facial massage, whilst lathering the shaving soap.

Other than maybe helping with Alzheimer's as claimed above, is there any benefit to this?

Andrew Huberman did an episode in October on the lymphatic system. I learned a lot. Highly recommend.

Because almost everything you can do in general has positive and negative effects. Focusing only on one side of the coin and through that view boost or reject that thing misses the full picture. You end up either over-idealizing or unfairly condemning it, instead of understanding the trade-offs involved and making a balanced, informed judgment.

Interesting, so you consider the entire scientific field of medicine to work without hard evidence?

You mean psychology? There’s no hard evidence there. The papers you’re citing are using human subjects in that sort of way. It’s pseudoscience at best

Medicine that involves testing human subject response to treatments is very different from the papers you’re citing and does involve falsifiable theses (usually, definitely not always).

I didn't link any studies. I'm not the person you originally replied to. I was trying to engage in your point that studies involving human subjects cannot contain hard evidence. And no I wasn't referring to psychology in my comment.

The problem is of course that no vehicles/devices as of now exist that are indestructible

I'm not sure you can really call it "early days" anymore. The first quantum computer was in 1998. That's 27 years ago.

"early days" means that the 1998 computer didn't have qubits that were below the error correction threshold. Now we have hundreds of qubits below threshold. We'll need millions of qubits like these for quantum computing to be useful. If that take decades, this is the "early days" relatively.

It's not only early days in hardware, it's early days in practical applications as well: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.09124

I admit it's early days in practical application. But in hardware definitely not.

Depends on what we mean by "early days on hardware".

If we mean "we've have been working on this for almost 3 decades. That's a very long time to be working on something!". I agree.

If we mean "We just now only have a few logical qubits that outperform their physical counterparts and we'll need thousands of these logical qubits to run anything useful" then we are still in the early days.

can you give a bit more information on 100's of qubits below threshold? I wasn't aware of 100's...

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09848-5 performs CZ gates on up to 256 qubits with fidelities of 99.5%, which is good enough to run surface codes below threshold.

Someone posting Hectors code or a quote does not mean he didn't leave. I'm really not sure how that could leave that impression.