What are you trying to prove?

ChatGPT: "The World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11, 2020."

I think it's amusing that it's trapped in a time capsule and still thinks that we're in lockdown.

Sounds somewhat like a simpler version of MMAcevedo:

https://qntm.org/mmacevedo

Forever obsessed with Wordle and Among Us.

I'm aware that it already passed its closest approach, but what does >3% even mean? 100% is >3%, but 3.000001% is >3% too. Was an impact certain at some point and the probability degraded to a bit above 3% over the course of the asteroid's trajectory? If so, I think I'd like to have a heads up when the probability is still closer to 100%, before it drops?

It was 3.4% https://newton.spacedys.com/neodys2/NEOScan/risk_page/ZTm003... If you're not logged in to Twitter, I don't think you can scroll from the linked tweet up to see the one this page was linked from, so I put it here.

I think the link works just fine and I can see it's at 3.4% right now, but was mostly wondering why it's written as >3% in the title. Most likely it's meant as ~3% like other people suggested and I shouldn't be reading to much in it :) Thank you for taking the effort to write your comment.

From the page: Impact probability 0.034

I guess OP decided to abbreviate to >3% instead of writing 3.4%

Personally I would’ve written ~3%

The linked page indicates:

Impact probability 0.034

Edit: Not familiar with the site, but I get the sense that this probability reflects the latest run. The probability hopefully gets more accurate as observations rise?

I couldn't readily figure out how to see the probability at each of the 8 observations for this one (perhaps this is the first run it's included in--all 8 observations predate this run?), but the page for actual impactors (https://newton.spacedys.com/neodys2/NEOScan/index_past_imp.h...) at least implies that accuracy may improves with each (and then maybe flip to 0/100?)

Think of it as the most sensational number you can write without lying. So it's between 3% and 4%.

I think it specifies that it’s a 3.4% probability in the page.

So it was just an odd choice of title by the poster.

Is Grammarly a third party when you interact with them or their product? And they don't actually record the data without the user's knowledge, do they?

They might not be a keylogger by their own definition, but everyone can design a definition like that: a thief steals stuff, gives it to a third party for the benefit of that party, and does so without the users's knowledge.

Robin Hood wasn't a thief by his own accord, because he steals openly and gives it to the poor.

Grammarly aren't keylogging by their own accord, because they tell you they're doing it, and they keep the data to themselves.

Still, I feel robbed.