On the livestream (perhaps elsewhere?) you can watch the submissions and scores come in over time. The LLM steadily increased (and sometimes decreased) it's score over time though by the end did seem to hit a lacuna. You could even see it try out new strategies (with walls e.g.) which didn't appear until about half-way through the competition.
Models like these don't see words as made of up letters but rather see the whole words (tokens) as a single entity. The result being they're not very good at creating novel (non-memorized) anagrams/palindromes and the like.
I think that would be a question of memory rather than having a conscious experience though I think it raises the question of whether consciousness can exist without some mechanism for memory even if only short term.
Our setup is quite similar to this. Some differences - each environment is represented as a helm parent chart with each application being a child chart. Each environment chart has it's own repo where values.yaml supplies environment specific overrides for each application. Each application has its own repo where the helm charts and application source both reside.
That is exactly how we're doing it as well, though I am interested in checking out Cloudbees'Jenkins. We've recently incorporated Zalenium (selenium grid which autoscales nicely natively in kubernetes) - just had to work a little magic with automatic service creation during builds.
I'd argue that there are more than three possibilities. One addition, for example, is that the concept of free will is under-defined and an intelligible conversation can't be had about it. I encourage you to define free will without resorting to synonyms like volition, free choice, and the likes.
It's because your comment belies your understanding of the article and the nature of the announcement. It makes no sense to compare AWS ECS in it's entirety to the rollout of containerd. The correct comparison in your case would be with Kubernetes Engine against ECS.