If you reassign the variable, e.g nums = append(nums, 16), that’s a different story can of worms entirely. ↩︎
Now consider the consequences of a sycophantic AI that generates responses by sampling examples consistent with the user’s hypothesis: d1∼p(d|h∗)d_{1}\sim p(d|h^{*}) rather than from the true data-generating process, d1∼p(d|true process)d_{1}\sim p(d|\text{true process}). The user, unaware of this bias, treats d1d_{1} as independent evidence and performs a standard Bayesian update, p(h|d1,d0)∝p(d1|h)p(h|d0)p(h|d_{1},d_{0})\propto p(d_{1}|h)p(h|d_{0}). But this update is circular. Because d1d_{1} was sampled conditional on hh, the user is updating their belief in hh based on data that was generated assuming hh was true. To see this, we can ask what the posterior distribution would be after this additional observation, averaging over the selected hypothesis h∗h^{*} and the particular piece of data generated from p(d1|h∗)p(d_{1}|h^{*}). We have，这一点在体育直播中也有详细论述
// Consume as text，推荐阅读体育直播获取更多信息
What Python's asyncio primitives get wrong about shared stateWe tried Event, Condition, and Queue. Each one gets closer but still breaks under real concurrency. Here's the observable pattern that finally works.
If we pull up the original commit introducing those files, the commit description reads: