I'm not sure I understand how important "role perception" is when following instructions from a tool call rather than the user is currently a legitimate use-case (applying steps from documentation, or shell command instructions on stdout, or really anything that can be deduced from the content of a tool call).
I think OP's question is more how could Newton's law "pass" a test any more than General Relativity would, considering that it's merely an edge case of GR?
You are comparing the fight between a p2p program and the entire music industry with the fight between the entire LLM industry and a newspaper. Notice how the order seems inconsistent.
It's a spectrum. Installing Postgres locally is not 100% future-proofing since you'll still need to migrate your local Postgres to a central Postres. Using Sqlite is not 0% future-proofing since it's still using the SQL standard.
If the only argument for a piece of tech in comparison to another one is "future-proofing", that's pretty much acknowledging the other one is simpler to setup and maintain.
> The meeting link itself directed to a spoofed Zoom meeting that was hosted on the threat actor's infrastructure, zoom[.]uswe05[.]us.
> Once in the "meeting," the fake video call facilitated a ruse that gave the impression to the end user that they were experiencing audio issues.
> The recovered web page provided two sets of commands to be run for "troubleshooting": one for macOS systems, and one for Windows systems. Embedded within the string of commands was a single command that initiated the infection chain.
I would not have helped. People are losing their mind over agents "security" when it's always the same story: You have a black box whose behavior you cannot predict (prompt injection _or not_). You need to assume worst-case behavior and guardrail around it.
This implication completely depends on the elasticity (or lack thereof) of demand for software. When marginal profit from additional output exceeds labor cost savings, firms expand rather than shrink.
One reason you see a pareto distribution in "normal sized" teams is not solely because of competency, but because the 80% can rest on the 20% and therefore don't feel too pressed to work that much. Therefore the pareto model breaks down in 1-man teams.
To be fair, the diction in modern movies is different than the diction in all other examples you mentioned. YouTube and live TV is very articulate, and old movies are theater-like in style.
Of course. IQ tests measures nothing more than the ability to pass an IQ test, which is proxied by a lot of things such as western culture, education, propensity to cram tests, etc.