simbolit

Same vibe here.

I don't know how our brains work.

If you don't just want to be snarky: I think the difference between acquisition and learning is important, I think the role of instruction might be important, I think the role of practice is important.

Been using these for some weeks: https://civitai.com/search/models?sortBy=models_v5&query=Sli...

What's un-controversial is claims like "There will never be..." are bullshit.

> That they are sensitive to statistical relationships does not discount their ability to understand.

The claim is that nothing but sensitivity to statistical relationships somehow leads to an ability to understand?

I am not going to believe it.

>The[re] will never be a successful society....

As I do hold degrees in the field studying this very question, may I kindly ask for your sources? Or, not being greedy here, reasons...?

I couldn't care less about the specific implementation.

My parent comment said "LLMs are useless for classification, because they can't give confidence scores". I think i have shown that to be demonstrably false.

The question is not if you can "remember" it. That is not what ownership in personal information is about.

The question is whether you can __sell__ the information that I had three double cheese burgers and extra greasy fries to my health insurance provider.

As user siminion314 wrote: "If [it] is needed for the service (...) you just ask"

A biometric id system which can only distinguish "clowns" from "non-clowns" and makes a lot of errors with regard to the images of famous billionaires.

That is funny.

Your example? Not funny at all.

You do not explain why these rules are stupid, much less "the stupidest".

Both rules, on first sight, make __a lot__ of sense.

If you want to know how bullshit intellectual "property" is, ask the simple question of who owns the personal information the ad company collected about me?

Of course, the ad company owns it, because of their hard intellectual work of collecting it.

Me? No, why would I own information about me? What logic of property is this?

I now see how you can argue that it doesn't protect you, in a very personal meaning of you.

Then, is there anything that can protect __you__ from rubber hose cryptanalysis in this sense?

If not, what does my parent comment even mean?

I think that is a wrong take.

Rubberhose FS does protect you from rubberhose cryptanalysis. That is the point.

You can argue, that it over-protects you, which might be just as or even more dangerous, and that is a fair criticism.

But I don't see how you can argue that it "doesn't protect" you.

In what sense is a nand chip, a memory controller, and a usb plug, a "computer these days"?

It is a stochastic parrot.

The error is deriving human ideas of 'quality' from that.

The stochastic parrot might well be better at your job than you are.

Auto Label can do it even with closed-source LLMs: https://www.refuel.ai/blog-posts/labeling-with-confidence

Also, your 90% number is a 'plausible-looking hallucination', which is mildly funny.

I agree, the difference isn't large. But my parent was asking for the difference, and I think that is the difference.

The BIG difference is that you have to trust the hardware and the operating system already, and as these are made by apple, you already have to trust them.

"Trusting the servers of a non E2E service" is adding another trusted party.

If you don't trust apple, you don't have an iPhone.

Situation 1, Year 1: Rich person has 100, the one hundred poor people have 1.

Situation 1, Year 2: Rich person has 150, the one hundred poor people have 1.2

Situation 2, Year 1: Rich person has 100, the one hundred poor people have 1.

Situation 2, Year 2: Rich person has 150, the one hundred poor people have 0.8

Both situations show increasing wealth inequality, but only one shows wealth redistribution up the ladder.

The goal of Wikipedia is for every "person on the planet [to be] given free access to the sum of all human knowledge".

The community is a means to that end, not the end.

Non-technical as in "the average user isn't a nerd" ?

For non-nerd populations, these numbers seem high.

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna19173330 - Two Red Cross workers killed in Lebanon camp

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/02/10/5145078... - six killed in Afghanistan

https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/two-red-cross-workers-k... - Two Red Cross workers killed in attack in western Mali

I think you might just not be well informed, combined with being too lazy to do a 2 minute web search "red cross workers killed".

I half expect you now to say "yeah, but it isn't that many people", which might be because it is a a WAR CRIME to kill Red Cross workers. Really, seriously smh.

>notice how's no Red Cross or any such presence in the Donbass

"The Russian Red Cross (RKK), together with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), will provide assistance to internally displaced persons in Donbass"

https://www.emergency-live.com/news/the-other-side-of-the-fi...

>to say nothing of the many countries in the Sahel

Red Cross in Mali: https://www.icrc.org/en/where-we-work/africa/mali

Red Cross in Niger: https://www.icrc.org/en/document/operational-update-niger-mo...

Could you explain further?

Firefox rennaissance anyone?

Ireland and Portugal already are together in this time zone, but the UK is with them, which makes good friday sense.

Map of Timezones: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/World_Ti...

(1) abolishing daylight savings time is great and should have been done years ago.

(2) the proposed time zones are really impractical, not necessarily in principle, but in their specific implementation. Germany-Netherlands in different time zones is strange, Dublin and Belfast in different time zones is stupid, Athens and Crete in different time zones is absurd.

What does your food analogy show?

We already have a market for books, we can observe the market for books, why do we need a food analogy?

Not really.

There are a million novels now, of which 90% is self-published for a reason (no one wants to publish it, because it won't make any money). With a text generator, there are now 10min lion novels, of which 99% won't make any money.

The book market has found methods to deal with the "99% is garbage" problem. This isn't new.

> mediocre but quickly producible content swamped the market

I hear stuff like this all the time. It feels odd, given that pulp fiction dimeback "novels" exist for over a century. Some of these series run into several thousand issues, with authors expected to write a new novel each week.

The "mediocre but quickly producible content" has existed for ever, and it hasn't drowned out the "serious" novel market. Why should it now?