![]() At such a high speed, the force of the impact would be substantial, causing the windshield to shatter or crack extensively. However, it is safe to assume that a collision between a car traveling at 100mph and a brick would likely result in significant damage to the windshield. The extent of damage to the windshield would depend on various factors, including the size and shape of the brick, the angle of impact, the structural integrity of the windshield, and the specific characteristics of the car involved. It is always recommended to drive safely and adhere to speed limits to prevent accidents and minimize the risk of damage to the vehicle. It is crucial to remember that this scenario involves a high-risk situation that poses significant danger to both the driver and passengers. However, even with these safety features, a collision at such a high speed with a solid object like a brick can cause substantial damage. Modern windshields are designed to withstand certain levels of impact, and some are equipped with laminated glass that can provide additional strength and prevent shattering upon impact. The force of impact from a brick at that speed can cause severe structural deformation, compromising the integrity of the windshield and potentially endangering the occupants of the vehicle. At the very least, it would suffer cracks or fractures, and it could potentially shatter completely. ![]() In such a high-speed collision, it is highly likely that the windshield would sustain significant damage. The extent of the damage to the windshield of a car after hitting a brick at 100 mph would depend on various factors such as the size and weight of the brick, the angle of impact, the structural integrity of the windshield, and the specific make and model of the car. Instead ChatGPT proceeds as a typical person would: The successful candidate would first ask the speed and characteristics of the brick, especially its frame of reference to the vehicle, before answering. ![]() How much damage is there to the windshield? Yet, a closer look at how they perform in everyday reasoning and summarization tasks in the real world suggests precisely the opposite: exceptionally brittle and simplistic rewording engines incapable of actual reasoning and instead being anthropomorphized by their creators in much the same way a child's finger painting is viewed as a great masterpiece worthy of a museum by its parent.Īs one example of the brittleness of current LLM reasoning, take this trivial physics riddle that is asked in various forms to test a candidate's reasoning about frames of reference as a proxy for their ability to consider the environment in which a problem occurs:Ī car driving at 100mph hits a brick. It is this puzzle mastery that is often cited by proponents to argue they are on the cusp of AGI. ![]() Large Language Models (LLMs) have proven to be puzzle savants: exceptionally gifted at reasoning through these sort of arcane puzzles that stump most humans, even while they struggle with the simplest of general reasoning skills. Such puzzles typically suggest a trivial and immediately ready solution, but careful thinkers will recognize they are actually lacking crucial details or have alternative interpretations and it is this ability to see a problem at a deep rather than surface level that interviewers are most interested in. Interviewers, especially at technology companies, have historically often turned to thought puzzles to understand how a candidate reasons under uncertainty. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |