![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
That’s not how these addictive disorders works… they’re never satisfied and always need more.
That’s not how these addictive disorders works… they’re never satisfied and always need more.
It feeds and evolves a disorder which in turn increases risks of real life abuse.
But if AI generated content is to be considered illegal, so should all fictional content.
Yeah no I doubt it
I’ve had mine for two years without burn ins
FORGET GAY MOE
Never!
No, they just calculate with increased size of the training roster… it’s not that complicated. Which is a fair presumption as that is how we’ve increased the predictive precision so far.
Well obviously they cannot rule out techniques no one has though of but likewise they obviously accounted for what they deemed to be within the realm of possibility
What you mentioned is assumed video and paper in question.
The main argument being that no matter our computational techniques, the diminishing returns in predictive precision is reached far sooner than we achieve general intelligence.
It clearly isn’t!
A) Man has dreamt of Artificial Intelligence for decades now, often times very much realizing the capabilities (and dangers) of such technology B) AI in its current form already support business, hobbies, creative work etc. The traffic and processing power needed is constantly rising.
I feel with a such a bold (and just incorrect) statement the article cannot be much worth to read.
No, there will be Spyware in the fucking diodes…
Whats the matter? Can’t stand the awesome force of DEMOCRACY^TM 🫡 through a barrel?
The Art History majors? Yeah I know what you mean.
It’s a recurring theme in the US school system. And it seems to be primarily female teachers going after boy students, which makes it noteworthy.
You throw out random sources that you hope would support your claim, so yeah, I feel this thing is done to. From the start, actually, waste of time.
Of course the bombing campaign was purposed to pressure the Japanese government to surrender, but that it was, as you claim, so that the US didn’t have to carve up Japan with the Soviets is a claim that lacks support, and I couldn’t find that claim in your sources neither.
Your source states, based on your quote, that the atomic bombings would be unnecessary if the strategic bombing continued… and that’s your argument for why the atomic bombings were unjustified?
So much conjecture, but if you have any good sources, feel free to share.
All that was needed…
What? You provided a source that states just that?..
Now that’s the Doomer mindset!