Columbus is the one who opened up the Americas for economic exploitation. If that’s not “discovery” what is? 
I give that a pass because it’s the cricket team only I think.
I don’t think I have heard it in other contexts.
(ETA and obviously cricket is just an inscrutable mystery to those not initiated. I really appreciate a game you can play for five days and nobody wins but it’s not exactly a draw either. Plus things like the Duckworth Lewis Method).
From the comments:
So they scraped the internet, gobbling up educational materials in the process.
Then they told their AI to write educational materials based on the educational materials they scraped up.
THEN they had humans edit those new educational materials to, presumably, be more like the original educational materials.
That ‘soft services’ list being munchable is quite something. Who needs case management, right? Or any management at all, apparently?
Will they listen? probably not.
Not unless somebody pays them to, no.
Well, let’s be fair here. 2010 was far back in the ancient past. Mankind had not yet discovered Snapchat’s face swapping.
To be fair, when I think about me in the past, I was pretty stupid.
You might think that the way I phrased that implies that I am no longer stupid, and I am happy to let you think that.
I mean, I have genuinely decided some of my opinions on AI were nonsense in the last ten years. I really didn’t think you could build a Chinese room that could convincingly hold a conversation without some kind of variables that would represent an internal model of meaning. Obviously, that’s been demonstrated to be total garbage.
Are AI ‘hallucinations” a growing problem for the legal profession? Some say yes. See, e.g., Michael Hiltzik, “AI ‘hallucinations’ are a growing problem for the legal profession,” Los Angeles Times (May 22, 2025). Those people are right.
How right are they? At least this much. Because that’s a link to the “AI Hallucination Database” webpage administered by Damien Charlotin, a lawyer, lecturer, and researcher in Paris who focuses on “AI, the law, and the multiple ways these coexist.” And one of the ways these coexist is not very well, as illustrated by the ever-increasing number of cases in which lawyers, many of whom are quite intelligent themselves, have gotten in trouble for submitting the legal work of certain alleged artificial intelligences to courts around the world.
149 cases in the database so far, and it’s only counting cases where the hallucinations were found and a decision was made based on that discovery…
I didn’t watch this, but of course crypto and AI are closely related: the same bullshitters and fad surfers that had latched onto crypto have now fully pivoted to AI.
This is, bizarrely, one of the most accurate and informative videos of AI I’ve seen. It’s also really funny.
It’s hard to tell. He has some stuff in there that’s made to look like bad AI but isn’t actually AI. But he probably did use some AI, but to show how bad it is.
