What a waste of time. Both the article and the researchers.

Literally by the time their research was published, it was using irrelevant models, on top of the fact that, yeah, that’s how LLMs work. That would be obvious from 5m of using them.

While I generally agree, I have seen the argument that grass will grow in thin soil where crops will not, so you can theoretically turn land that’s unusable for crops into being usable for producing beef…

But that was more of a land use argument than an environmental one.

People here are generally going to be distrustful towards the government, and for good reason, this feels like gross overreach imho, but at the same time, I think it’s a little naiive to view all potential terrorists as tech savvy enough to know to use the right open source encryption package. I’m sure this would help them catch some percentage more of attackers.

Again, to be clear, I don’t think that’s remotely worth the damage that unencrypted messaging can do, but there’s enough examples of incompetence and bad opsec amongst criminals to think that someone would just continue to use whatever is most convenient or what their friend told them is good.

This literal entire comment chain is about how the article’s foreign policy criticism of Bernie is that he endorsed Kamala, and she didn’t do enough to stop the Palestinian genocide.

Oh please do go ahead and tell me how much Trump is doing to stop that.

Oh what’s that? Nothing?

Are you saying that it was fucking obvious everyone should vote for and endorse Kamala?

Jesus fucking Christ, anyone who didn’t support Kamala was dumb as fuck. Full stop. If your criticism of Bernie was that he supported the obvious lesser of two evils then maybe you deserve the president you got.

Our privacy was long gone well before AI companies were even founded, if people cared about their privacy then none of the largest tech companies would exist because they all spy on you wholesale.

In the US. The EU has proven that you can have perfectly functional privacy laws.

If your reasoning is based o the US not regulating their companies and so that makes it impossible to regulate them, then your reasoning is bad.

That information is published freely online.

Do companies have to avoid hiring people who read and were influenced by copyrighted material?

I can regurgitate copyrighted works as well, and when someone hires me, places like Stackoverflow get fewer views to the pages that I’ve already read and trained on.

Are companies committing theft by letting me read the internet to develop my intelligence? Are they committing theft when they hire me so they don’t have to do as much research themselves? Are they committing theft when they hire thousands of engineers who have read and trained on copyrighted material to build up internal knowledge bases?

What’s actually happening, is that the debates around AI are exposing a deeply and fundamentally flawed copyright system. It should not be based on scarcity and restriction but rewarding use. Information has always been able to flow freely, the mistake was linking payment to restricting it’s movement.

No it’s not.

It can be problematic behaviour, you can make it illegal if you want, but at a fundamental level, making a copy of something is not the same thing as stealing something.

Piracy is not theft.

I honestly cannot fathom how CN is such a pile of garbage. Does anyone understand why they can’t do the basic things that rail owners do, every single day, all over the world?

Trash article.

Their foreign policy criticism of Bernie is that he told people to vote for Kamala, and she didn’t do enough to stop the genocide in Gaza.

Like Jesus Christ, people like this are why the Democrats cant win.

Haha, I’m guessing you didn’t see what instance I’m from, I just remember what it was like pre-legalization.

1. Hiding it’s shape.

   • If someone can see you but can’t smell it (through a cop car windshield, or nosy neighbour’s window, for instance).

2. Sharing it.

   • It’s easier to pass a joint from person to person pinched from the bottom

3. Structural Integrity.

   • Hand rolled joints with inconsistently ground weed tend to be more fragile, holding by their filter is often safer.

4. Smoking all of it

   • Weed smokers are more likely to smoke right to the bottom (since it was historically expensive / hard to get). Sometimes a smoker might not even have a filter and literally go til it burns the finger tips, in this scenario they can grip much more finely with a thumb-index pinch.

Showing someone Control after their minds were blown by Severence, is probably how I felt when I found SCP after having my mind blown by Control.

deleted by creator

Lol, gamers hate on Microsoft constantly, I don’t think their image is remotely white washed.

And the primary reason that Microsoft is so heavily associated with gaming (and CAD software, etc), is because they’re the ones who built DirectX, which creates an abstraction layer that developers can target without worrying about the underlying hardware and graphics cards.

Nowa days we finally have OpenGL and it’s successors, but Microsoft’s link to gaming was established by spending decades being basically the only company willing to create a more flexible and open gaming platform than consoles. Is that as nice as having open source code and standards as the abstraction layer? No, but it’s a lot nicer than Apple, Sega, Nintendo, Sony, etc who all wanted to tie the hardware directly to the games.

Lion King is an actual adaptation of Hamlet that tells its own story following the rough large plot beats of Hamlet. Avatar is just Pocahontas set in the Halo universe, with the names switched.

And at a base level, the Disney version of the Pocahontas story is not a particularly interesting or nuanced plot line, which makes its adaptations that much more plainly obvious and surface level, compared to something introspective like Hamlet.

Skyrim’s varied gameplay systems?

It has stealth, it has magic, it has melee combat, it has ranged combat, it has dialogue options for talking your way through stuff, it has multiple ways of solving quest lines…

It’s basically Skyrim, if it was smaller and more focused, with better combat, voice acting, level design, and heads and tails better writing.

You’re not wrong, but I went off on it because the person I’m replying to pushed the idea that people were hating on it because it was their personality as opposed to hating on it for its flaws.

From a mechanistic standpoint I think that mostly has to do with the high cost of entry for games.

At $80-$100 for a full priced game these days, it’s hard to just buy on a whim. The only time you would is when they’re on sale, which happens well after initial release. So initial sales of games are basically entirely driven by reviews and online discourse (which itself has an effect on reviews), and you basically just have a bunch of people all waiting for the signal to buy or not.

I do think that services like Gamepass are a genuinely good way of reducing that effect, because now anyone can try anything on a lark.