As an GenAI skeptic, I think this is a very cool finding. My experience with AI tools is that they are complete bullshit artists. But to a large extent that's just a result of the way they are trained. If this description of how the data is structured is correct, it indicates that these programs do encode a real model about the world. Perhaps alternative ways of training these same models, or fixing the data afterwards, will result in more truthful models.
If you ever need to do that in the future in Java for whatever reason, Java actually has it already in the standard library--it's called LinkedHashMap.
Yeah, I think I knew that even at the time, but I suspect if my answer was just "import java.util.LinkedHashMap", they might have been a bit disappointed.
It's extremely oriented towards laymen, and if you think it sounds interesting, you will probably enjoy it a lot. (Even if you don't agree with its conclusions)
I assume what they meant was that only some colors are pure frequencies, and most are more complex waveforms. As the sibling comment gestures at, "magenta" is the sum of a pure blue wave plus a pure red wave.
"Color" also can refer to several different phenomena which were historically conflated in a way that made teasing apart certain observations difficult. It's a property of objects (apples are red), a property of light (lasers are red) and a property of perception (I see red).
It's a three way if statement that scrutinizes a number rather than a boolean, with branches for negative, zero and positive values.