Communities like https://lemmy.world/c/independentmormonism, https://lemmy.world/c/independentcatholicism, https://lemmy.world/c/thirdpartynews, all created today, and modded by a 9 day old user account with 640 comments and 334 posts.
Communities like https://lemmy.world/c/independentmormonism, https://lemmy.world/c/independentcatholicism, https://lemmy.world/c/thirdpartynews, all created today, and modded by a 9 day old user account with 640 comments and 334 posts.
I only bring it up to make the point that not everybody is calling what Nvidia is doing ‘groundbreaking innovation’.
I mean, Nvidia is being sued by rightsholders in a class action lawsuit.
I hear the term ‘broken up’ a lot in media and discourse, but it’s never explained. In your eyes, what actually happens when a government ‘breaks up’ a corporation? I mean, what are the steps, objectives, and outcomes?
Not being adversarial, I’m just curious.
This seems interesting. What’s the context here?
I take your anti-corporate point. However, I believe pro-doping would totally work if it was a gladiatorial bloodbath decathalon within the olympics itself. And if you get caught doping in the non-doping sports, you’re forced to compete in the decathalon with the juiced up killers. Jousting, Barenuckle boxing, Pride rules MMA, Hell in a Cell, no rules water polo, shit like that.
Grow up.
Before this is all over, MS will be charging users to extract their snapshots from a proprietary cloud-only one drive account. The recovery process will take about 3 hours, and involve scrolling through ai-authored help articles that don’t lay out clearly and methodically how to access the old snapshots. The comments on the help articles will begin with “Hello sir, can you confirm that you have followed the steps at this link?”. The link, before delivering you to an irrelevant solution, will shunt you to a landing page that forces you to log into your microsoft account before you can see the answer.
“We don’t understand. Why aren’t people simply searching for Taylor Swift”
The moral of the stone soup story is that greedy people can and should be tricked into sharing. Everything old is new again.
As soon as I learned that Crank wasn’t cinéma vérité, I couldn’t take Jason Statham seriously ever again.
For real!
all it took to convince them evolution is completely wrong is a couple paragraphs about Lamarck and giraffes and Haeckel and embryos
That’s incredibly shocking and concerning.
By proclaiming Newton is wrong, it leads to people concluding that all science is wrong, because there is always someone working on the next iteration
I’ve never had sympathy for this line of thinking. Is the average person truly too ignorant to understand that science is a constantly developing process of better understanding our universe, not some set of unimpeachable rules carved into stone tablets once and forever? The fact that science can be updated, changed, revolutionized, is what makes it powerful.
If people need to be ‘protected’ from that fact, there is something fundamentally wrong with the way science is taught in schools. I can’t accept that the average person can’t comprehend such a simple idea that would take less than an hour to convincingly communicate.
Just kind of dawned on me while looking at the number, Reddit’s licensing deal with Google is valued at $60 million per year. That’s really not very much money at all, considering the amount of data Reddit has and continues to accumulate. And chump change for Google, no doubt. Reveals how little leverage Reddit actually has at this point. This was their flagship deal, and the best they could get was $60mil per year.
Also puts the API fiasco in a new light. “Look, we need to charge for API calls, because we need to restrict public access to data as a precondition of selling all your shit in a few months to Google, for the financial equivalent of a cup of coffee.”
Think it’s more of an allusion to lurking habits, active times, metadata, stuff not related to public posts. I’d imagine the average user has plenty of stuff they’ve browsed through that they wouldn’t want their family / co-workers, etc. to know.
Would also need to get a burner phone number w/ answering machine to take calls from 240 million grandmas, cheapskate businesses and cash-strapped public schools for any & all tech support questions until the end of time, because if there was an issue with system stability in any way whatsoever, or if the router went down or the printer stopped working, they’d assume it was the fault of ‘the guy who changed everything’.
Linux is great & everything, but this sounds like a recipe for utter disaster, not a way to make an easy buck.
Interesting. I’m curious to know more about what you think of training datasets. Seems like they could be described as a stored representation of reality that maybe checks the boxes you laid out. It’s a very different structure of representation than what we have as animals, but I’m not sure it can be brushed off as trivial. The way an AI interacts with a training dataset is mechanistic, but as you describe, human worldviews can be described in mechanistic terms as well (I do X because I believe Y).
You haven’t said it, so I might be wrong, but are you pointing to freewill and imagination as somehow tied to intelligence in some necessary way?
Thanks! I’m not clear on what you mean by a worldview simulation as a scratch pad for reasoning. What would be an example of that process at work?
For sure, defining intelligence is non trivial. What clear the bar of intelligence, and what doesn’t, is not obvious to me. So that’s why I’m engaging here, it sounds like you’ve put a lot of thought into an answer. But I’m not sure I understand your terms.
I see what you mean, but I disagree. Bot accounts are categorically different in this space. It’s impossible to have a meaningful conversation with a bot. So when I see things like bot activity disguised to look like organic human activity, especially when it aligns with hostile foreign state interests, that’s something that I think is uniquely bad and worth pointing out and combating.