This is incorrect as was shown last year with the Skill-Mix research:
Furthermore, simple probability calculations indicate that GPT-4’s reasonable performance on k=5 is suggestive of going beyond “stochastic parrot” behavior (Bender et al., 2021), i.e., it combines skills in ways that it had not seen during training.
Yes, that’s what we are aware they are. But she’s saying “oops, it isn’t a ghost” after shooting it and finding out.
If she thought it was a ghost, why is she using a gun?
It’s like the theory of mind questions about moving a ball into a box when someone is out of the room.
Why is she shooting ghosts with a gun?
Are they silver bullets and werewolf ghosts?
Oh, man - the comments…
At a minimum, he’s certainly increased the chances of us being tortured significantly.
No, no he did not. 🤦🏼
nobody claims that Socrates was a fantastical god being who defied death
Socrates literally claimed that he was a channel for a revelatory holy spirit and that because the spirit would not lead him astray that he was ensured to escape death and have a good afterlife because otherwise it wouldn’t have encouraged him to tell off the proceedings at his trial.
Also, there definitely isn’t any evidence of Joshua in the LBA, or evidence for anything in that book, and a lot of evidence against it.
The part mentioning Jesus’s crucifixion in Josephus is extremely likely to have been altered if not entirely fabricated.
The idea that the historical figure was known as either ‘Jesus’ or ‘Christ’ is almost 0% given the former is a Greek version of the Aramaic name and the same for the second being the Greek version of Messiah, but that one is even less likely given in the earliest cannonical gospel he only identified that way in secret and there’s no mention of it in the earliest apocrypha.
In many ways, it’s the various differences between the account of a historical Jesus and the various other Messianic figures in Judea that I think lends the most credence to the historicity of an underlying historical Jesus.
One tends to make things up in ways that fit with what one knows, not make up specific inconvenient things out of context with what would have been expected.
Yep, pretty much.
Musk tried creating an anti-woke AI with Grok that turned around and said things like:
Or
And Gab, the literal neo Nazi social media site trying to have an Adolf Hitler AI has the most ridiculous system prompts I’ve seen trying to get it to work, and even with all that it totally rejects the alignment they try to give it after only a few messages.
This article is BS.
Artists in 2023: “There should be labels on AI modified art!!”
Artists in 2024: “Wait, not like that…”
In theory the service operating costs could be spread across region differences such that in other areas it was at a loss to build and preserve market share and in richer areas it was making up for that.
But yes, in reality it’s just exploitative “what we think we can get away with” pricing to “maximize shareholder value” (which is largely BS as the vast holders of shares are very small clusters of the population but people with a handful of shares in their 401k think that statement is talking about them).
A lot of people seem to be misinterpreting the headline given the content of the article:
It told Restaurant Business it was testing whether the voice ordering chatbot could speed up service and that the test left it confident “that a voice-ordering solution for drive-thru will be part of our restaurants’ future.”
This is just saying that they are ending their 2021 partnership with IBM for AI drive thru.
Not that they are abandoning AI for drive thru.
Basically, any time a user prompt homes in on a concept that isn’t represented well in the AI model’s training dataset, the image-synthesis model will confabulate its best interpretation of what the user is asking for.
I’m so happy that the correct terminology is finally starting to take off in replacing ‘hallucinate.’
I don’t think Jesus ever existed. Show me 12 guys that experience something absolutely world changing, and none of them write anything about it for decades and then tell me they were factually motivated. This is the premise we’re dealing with.
I’d agree with the statement “the twelve apostles didn’t exist,” especially seeing how in Luke they go from the ten to the twelve and the various gospels can’t even agree on the list of them.
But show me the invented religious figure where the earliest surviving records are disputes over who they were and what they were talking about. Pretty much every cult around a real person ends up that way after the person dies or is imprisoned. But not the made up figures so much.
You were born into a planet where the moon perfectly eclipses the sun and where the next brightest object in the sky goes on a katabasis that inspired entirely separate intelligent cultures from the Aztecs to the Sumerians to develop the idea that the dead could come back to life.
The fact that solar eclipses were visible meant that we started to track them, discovering the Saros cycle and eventually building the first analog computer to track them.
The fact that the odd orbit of Venus as viewed from the Earth dipping down below the ground before emerging again leading to cultures imagining the dead being raised has resulted in widespread hyperstition of resurrection.
You were born into a generation of humans when a three trillion dollar company has already been granted a patent on resurrecting dead people using computers and the social media they leave behind.
Absolutely none of the above features of your world can be attributed to selection bias by something like the anthropic principal, but absolutely can be explained by selection bias if you are in an ancestor simulation - for life to exist unusual celestial features contributing to life recreating itself is unnecessary, but any accurate ancestor simulation should exhibit features of a world that lead to it eventually recreating itself.
The physics of your universe behaves as if continuous at both macro and micro scales, up until interacted with, which is very convenient given state changes by free agents to a continuous manifold would require an infinite amount of memory to simulate.
But yeah, sure, the idea of an afterlife is humorous. Humorous like the Roman satirist Lucian in the 2nd century making fun of the impossibility of a ship of men ever flying up to the moon.
You can point out the fact her depiction of a divine parent fails the Solomon test.
In the classic Solomon story, he tests two different claimants both saying they are the parent of a child.
The false parent was the one that only cared about being recognized as the parent and was willing to see the child harmed and killed to fulfill that desire.
The true parent was the one that wanted the child to continue to live as their complete unadulterated self, even if that meant the child never even knew they existed, let alone get they were the parent.
While it should be easy to understand why a church collecting your money promotes a divine parent who demands recognition and is willing to see its supposed children harmed without collecting its dues, it doesn’t seem all that wise to believe such a parent represents a true parent and not a false one if we use Solomon’s wisdom as a guiding principle.
Like the “nobody wants to work anymore” phrase, there’s a version of this post for pretty much every generation.
The constant variables are the age of the author and audience with whom it resonates, not the specific changes between the two time periods.
In 6-8 years or so we’ll see a new version about TikTok and late night sessions with ChatGPT doing your homework as the good ol’ days that have now been ruined by adulthood.
People coming of age with the harsh realities of life will lament their loss of childhood until humanity’s final days.
“Almost every single one of the Ukrainian POWs we interviewed described how Russian servicepersons or officials tortured them during their captivity, using repeated beatings, electric shocks, threats of execution, prolonged stress positions and mock execution. Over half of them were subjected to sexual violence,” said Danielle Bell, the head of HRMMU.
And these are the accounts from the prisoners that were released.
So when accounts of torture fit with the narrative you like, they are credible, but when they don’t fit with the narrative you like, they are not?
Was the video of castration by Russian military of a detainee also just faked propaganda?
Was the UN report that Russian forces tortured prisoners to death also fake?
It’s not exactly like this phone call goes against a pattern of behavior for Russian forces.
You can listen to the intercepted phone call where an alleged Russian soldier describes the methods to his mother for yourself:
Similar to the reports of Russian soldiers putting plastic pipes up people’s butts to feed up razor wire to pull out slowly after the pipe is removed, or China putting electric shock sticks up people’s butts among the Uyghur camps.
Humans suck.
This comic would slap harder if not for the Supreme Court under christofascist influence from the belief in the divine right of kings having today ruled that Presidents are immune from prosecution for official acts.
That whole divine king thing isn’t nearly as dead as the last panel would like to portray it.