Well actually there's ways to automate quality assurance.
If a programmer reasonably knew that one of these 10,000 files was the "correct" code, they could pull out quality assurance tests and find that code pretty dang easily, all things considered.
Those tests would eliminate most of the 9,999 wrong ones, and then the QA person could look through the remaining ones by hand. Like a capcha for programming code.
The power usage still makes this a ridiculous solution.
He gave her the ball
Sorry I forgot to send it, won't happen again, boss.
The "I can't believe you're so thin" is still mildly infuriating.
Most that would die in the street would have an underlying condition, like ague or bleeding or even old age, since most people that starve would try to do something about it.
If you're sick you might not be able to. If you find a job or charity successfully you've averted the death. If you tried to steal and fail you'll get on the executed list, or if you got wounded but got away, you'll be on the bleeding list, or if you succeed then you dont die on the street.
I imagine those six would have the "died of unknown causes" phrase attached to them in modern times.
That's good to know, thank you
Why exactly?
The Pacific is pretty big, it's an ocean after all.
You can use the charcoal kiln to avoid buying your coal. 10 wood becomes 1 coal, and especially if you're fishing-focused, you should have plenty of room for some trees
1/10000, but I don't think modern banks accept this conversion anymore, so its up to the free market.
Dang a pug with ADHD. I'm glad you have it somewhat sorted, though.
What does that mean
I do agree it's not realistic, but it can be done.
I have to assume the people that allow the AI to generate 10,000 answers expect that to be useful in some way, and am extrapolating on what basis they might have for that.
Unit tests would be it. QA can have a big back and forth with programming, usually. Unlike that, QA can just throw away a failed solution in this case, with no need to iterate on that case.
I mean, consider the quality of AI-generated answers. Most will fail with the most basic QA tools, reducing 10,000 to hundreds, maybe even just dozens of potential successes. While the QA phase becomes more extensive afterwards, its feasible.
All we need is... Oh right, several dedicated nuclear reactors.
The overall plan is ridiculous, overengineered, and solved by just hiring a developer or 2, but someone testing a bunch of submissions that are all wrong in different ways is in fact already in the skill set of people teaching computer science in college.