1,538 karma · joined July 28, 2009
What’s the FAA considering in approving or denying a request like this?
I feel like compressing knowledge and being able to answer questions about the knowledge, with the ability to explore “what if” differences seems more like it suggests real understanding. And that’s what these LLMs can do.
For ex, I don’t think police should ever have the right to privacy while on duty. Turning off body or security cameras should be a crime for them, and anything that happens after should be assumed to have been done with criminal intent.
But I don’t think they should have their faces used in ads without their permission. That seems like a weird difference to apply to them.
First you have to put aside whether they should have been there, and whether they committed crimes while on his property. Basically start by assuming the police in this situation are unsympathetic criminals.
What rights do they still have even if they’re the bad guys here?
They don’t have a right to privacy. It’s fine to publish videos of them stealing his money. It’s fine to make fun of them.
But do you have the right to use their image in a video, for profit?
Where’s the line between being allowed to make, own, and publish a video of someone, and being allowed to profit from it?
If Tom Hanks visits your restaurant and is on your security camera, that’s legal. You can own that, and even publish it as a fact.
But can you make a commercial showing him eating in your restaurant? No. You’d need a model release for that.
You don’t get to use a video for commercial reasons, even if it’s ok to use it for editorial reasons.
When someone dies where does the consciousness go?
I don’t think there’s any law of conservation of consciousness.
Position A is basically treating this a completely reasonable suggestion that might have some downsides. It should be treating it as entirely unreasonable.
Position B would be more persuasive if it was a little chaotic, like arguing that NASA is terrible and should be destroyed, and so a monkey leader is a good choice.
The bot doesn’t “lose its mind”. It doesn’t agree the linked article is true, presumably because it was setup with contradictory beliefs. So it answers in a reasonable way to an article it believes is wrong.
Is it wrong? Yes. “Lost its mind”? There are much better examples of that happening than this.
Is it as bad as I think?
This seems to be 100% the fault of Tesla for selling unsafe equipment. Some amount of blame for the Tesla driver. 0% blame for the car that got cut off and hit the Tesla. And 100% blame for every car behind that crashed into the car in front of them.
I think there are lots of ways to hold an iPad or laptop where your hand rests near the screen, at least for scrolling.
On the other hand, a few fixes at lower levels will correct it for everyone above them.
Are they still giving equity in the chance that it goes public again someday?
Other than a good salary, where’s the financial upside?
It works super well for putting yourself in the images, the likeness is fantastic.
It’s obviously a small training process, they only take 20 images, but it works.
Should you turn on the machine? No, you should leave it off.
Only when your power sources are green should you turn on the machine.
So essentially there is still vesting, and no acceleration for regular employees.
Curious to hear if anyone knows otherwise.
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Twitter-Accelerated-Vesting-L...
And only show me lights that really exist and are for sale, etc.
It has to be really cold to do this, hence the big complicated heat shield.
Infrared let’s us see things that are further away, because when something’s really far away it gets red-shifted down out of the visible spectrum into the infrared (due to expansion of the universe).
So it’s not really any better at imaging things that are close / in the visible spectrum like Jupiter.