https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-often-pick-17-as-a-rando...

Low Low Prices! (Some Hallucinations)

More seriously. How do we fight this? Stricter penalties for these attorneys?

Edit - this case is particularly egregious because it’s not only false citations like you usually get, but even false testimony and false statements from witnesses

You should explain what you want to do

You should say where’s the position of the LLM in the stack. Top, bottom, whatever

I guess the answer to your question is most likely to be No. Perhaps you can be the first one to do it?

I don’t have any specific knowledge about more generalized dev environments such as rust for this scenario. If you go that route I think it would be important to be hyper competent in rust or whatever you use because the game-oriented support is less specific than dedicated game-dev rigs like Godot.

You are developing a project. So you could rethink and repost this later with more focus on your actual project not a hypothetical

https://www.apdaparkinson.org/article/the-relationship-betwe...

That is what OP was trying to say I assume

What research or statistics can you suggest to bolster this argument?

Ethereum moved to proof-of-stake in 2022, and it was initially expected to use only 1% of the energy it used when it was proof-of-work.

Turned out they were under-estimating the savings. According to studies by the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance and the Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute, Ethereum's 2022 switch to Proof-of-Stake reduced its global network energy consumption by over 99.98% overnight.

As far as I understand, this was made possible because the Ethereum protocol was set up to be made extensible like this (even though big changes like these are hard), while Bitcoin on the other hand, is stuck on proof-of-work forever, since its protocol does not allow for changing it.

- For better or worse, Ethereum has more centralized leadership (mainly the EF) which helps coordinate upgrades. Hard forks happen pretty regularly, and don't typically risk fracturing the community, unless the changes are particularly controversial (see Ethereum Classic).

- PoS wasn't that controversial, since it was planned from the beginning (see the difficulty bomb). Some users still resisted the switch - see the EthereumPoW fork - but for the most part the community was on board.

- The Bitcoin community OTOH values ossification. It rarely accepts proposed hard forks as "still Bitcoin"; that has only happened a few times in its history. The community's response to most proposed hard forks is "interesting, but that's not Bitcoin, call it something else."

- The Bitcoin community is also more ideologically and economically invested in PoW, so a proposed PoS fork would be extremely controversial, and would fracture the community (at best, if it gained any traction at all).

The point of PoW is that it resists monopolization unlike PoS.

In Vitalik's words: "If someone puts a gun to my head and tells me to write a hard-fork patch, I will definitely write it. If I publish a patch to delete a bunch of accounts, how many people here would download and install the update and switch to that chain? I see relatively few raised hands. This is called decentralization"

Validators are low requirements, in the RPI ballpark and and a lot if them are combined on a single host.

Then you also need some full nodes to access the data or submit transactions. So you can consider them part of the core infrastructure and those have higher requirements in terms of bandwidth and speed/capacity of storage but also CPU. But still a mini PC is fine.

Let's say a bank have 10k employees, you already might need more computer power just with their "laptops".

Now Ethereum is a global network competing with all the network of banks all around the world. So you can do a quick calculation its footprint is magnitude lower.

- [0] https://probelab.io/ethereum/

At the same time they are working with authorities.

Not everything needs an external consultant.

But, in its current state of development, is it of any use in earthquake preparedness or immediate response to an earthquake?

Right now, this is purely a pre-trained base model. It has learned the statistical distribution and vocabulary from seismology research papers, but it only knows how to predict the next token. Without Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and alignment (RLHF/DPO), it cannot act as a reliable assistant or follow instructions.

However, proving out this end-to-end pipeline was the necessary first step. Now that the infrastructure is in place, the roadmap is to scale up the parameter count and apply SFT to build something genuinely useful for post-earthquake response.

The vision is that in the critical minutes after a major earthquake, when we only have sparse, rapid telemetry (magnitude, location, affected area), an aligned domain-specific LLM, coupled with a RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) system, could instantly retrieve structurally similar historical events. It could help researchers and responders rapidly synthesize the likely faulting mechanisms, evaluate the localized tsunami potential, and assess the aftershock hazard based on physical constraints.

In disaster response, hallucination is unacceptable. That's exactly why I wanted to explore building a domain-specific model from the ground up, where we can strictly control the data mixture and eventually use RL to penalize it for violating physical laws, rather than just prompting a generic off-the-shelf model. So it's not ready for the emergency room today, but this is the foundation to get there.

The UI is almost perfect, it’s seamless on mobile and desktop.

I made some criticism in other comments therefore I also wanted to make a comment saying what I liked.

Also a version in which your unused time is accumulated for future rounds would be interesting

Also, maybe having a button (and also a key press) to randomly rearrange the letters, or allow me to drag them around to try to figure it out... like I'd do with scrabble tiles on my rack.