@Safaricom_Care Given the urgency and sensitivity of this matter, I kindly request Safaricom to facilitate the recovery and transfer process remotely through official customer support channels, including phone verification and digital processing where possible.
@Safaricom_Care
I am writing to formally raise a serious concern regarding the reassignment of my mobile number, which was recently sold to another individual despite the fact that I am still alive and actively dependent on the number for critical services and accounts.
@Safaricom_Care I have already contacted the individual currently using the number, and they have expressed willingness to release it back to me. However, the individual resides in a distant county, making physical travel and in-person processing difficult on my side.
@Safaricom_Care This number is linked to several essential platforms and institutions, including government services, bank accounts, HELB, NTSA, SHA, and school-related accounts. The reassignment has exposed me to risks involving access, verification, and account recovery.
@brian_armstrong You most definetely don't want to see in the list something an average American can afford at the moment. The rich talking for the rich. Just shut man
@AJamesMcCarthy Stupid question: Is it just a coincidence that most cameras capture this side of the moon? I am sure I have seen this before with nearly the same features.
@LyingFIA @AIoriginality It's kinda saddening that some writers and employers are taking this tool seriously. It does not at all check for originality and does not at all understand plagiarism. The idea behind it is great but it's not there yet. It's misleading and chaotic at the same time.
@AIoriginality So, tell your clients what your tool actually does. It can't be used to check for authenticity or originality. If ChatGPT comes up with something entirely, I get that. It's 100% AI. But having anything that comes into contact with AI as 100% AI, man that's wrong. Totally misleads
@AIoriginality You don't get my point. What your tool is doing is not checking for originality but checks whether some writing has been in contact with an AI tool like Grammarly. If I write about you, something that AI has no idea about, and use AI to fix my grammar, your tool would say 100% AI
@AIoriginality This is the article by the way:
Maslach, C., & Pines, A. (1977). The burn-out syndrome in the day care setting. Child care quarterly, 6, 100-113.
@AIoriginality This is from an article written in 1977 (Maslach & Pines, 1977). It gives 83% AI detection score. There was no GPT-2, GPT-J, GPT-NEO or GPT-3 back then as cited by the tool. Your tool is not testing for originality. This could be problematic. What exactly does your tool do?