“This part of the brand new technology that we are still figuring out is impossible”, refuses to elaborate
Is it possible that part of the message in this article is some nations would like us to give up on creating truthful AI? Saying hallucinations are impossible to fix is a great initial mood to vilify any uncomfortable truths it provided.
https://sopuli.xyz/pictrs/image/2eaf9f8c-d422-4f19-b542-b4eb72c4f3ba.webp?format=webp
This is a side effect of too much doomscrolling.
Start of the article shows the genuine reaction is there: “Children giggle as young people flash their smartphones to film robots carrying plates of freshly prepared meals on their inbuilt trays to deliver to diners in a busy eatery in Kenya’s capital.”
I cant say I disagree though, this is putting pressure on some of the twisted dynamics we live by indeed but i think your question doesn’t really work, exploiting people isnt the point, generating value with no regard of other life is and robotics make good slaves. The real issue is how will humans survive in an economy where there labor can no longer be used to obtain a share of the earth-pie.
What we can do is be vocal about normalizing universal basic income which has proven to work. This way we can still be hyped about the technology. Its going to be a matter of either we do get there or we wont live to tell the difference.
For real most devs are just happy you enjoy their work.
The only ones losing money are shareholders and they barely lose enough to make a trickle of a dent.
It is but so are phones and computers in general. Same with cars, many crimes require transportation.
I have gone deep into ufo and alien lore more then a few times.
This is a much bigger and complex question than people realize.
Grey aliens in theory have no genitals and sweat amonia, they supposedly drink a surgery liquid to sustain.
Does such life form need an asshole?
This is part of the theory that greys might be biological engineered lifeform or bio robots.
Regardless of wether you believe any of it it, truly interesting things to explore mentally.
Thank you for this. I consider myself technical and those words felt like a punch in the gut.
Why? Does 95% of digital advertisement even serve a single valuable purpose?
I get that websites need funding and that legitimate business require some way communicate their services exist. We need to solve the problem for the former and create specialized accessible safe spaces for the later.
When is the last time anyone here saw an ad for a local business, when is the last time anyone recall willfully clicking one? Was there actually anything useful there?
From what i recall ads almost always are one of the following:
sex, barely legal drugs and predatory video games. (Lumped together to make a bad pun)
real product/fake price: oh this item isnt in stock plz look at catalog
politics, buy our guide to get rich, actual illegal scam operation.
None of them are honest or respectful to the customer. People aren’t prey, stop baiting.
Admittedly, for me this is personal. Autism means i experience the extra noise as painful. Plastering it on useful websites feels like a hostile attack to keep me out and unwelcome. I downright refuse to look at watch nor will i support them through ad free subscriptions to the point of it having become a digital disability.
But come on, can we smart online people really not figure out something else that isn’t based on literal brainwashing.
Well you could always just use the proper name. The cc license in question IS anti commercial. A great deal of ai is opens source and non commercial and to those cc is fair game. But if commercial is where you draw the line then envoking this license may do.
This comment is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 (Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International)
Calling it “anti-ai” when its not removes power from your argument. Your invoking something that does not exit and linking to something seemingly unrelated.
Now the bigger question i have, have had since i have seen people do this.
Why is there still not an actual anti-ai license? Seems obvious that there is a need for it? I dont know much about how licenses are created but it strikes me as odd.
Well i understand its to combat ai from training on your comments right, maybe also to poison the data?
I just don’t see what taking a non relevant licensee and giving it a different name is doing to stop that. Trivial to filter stuff like this out in a dataset.
At best an individual data scraping company decides to honor it out of kindness. At worst people think that its a real license and copy it with a false sense of security.
Just FYI the license in your comment doesn’t actually exist and the creative commons license it links to does not mention AI anywhere.
I had no idea and i thought i was relatively up to date with new gen technology. I thought the foldable phones that came out where more an experimental proof of concept of the first instance of such technology but not that whole flexible panels where possible.
Even just the fact an oled display can be this thin is completely new to me.
Good luck with overpriced shipping :) but still for something i though was not yet possible its shockingly accessible.
Found them on amazon holy shit.
You’d think something like this would be major tech news, people have been talking about this tech for ages and a consensus for many is that it wasn’t impossible. (Look at all the crap foldable phones)
It’s objectively not cheap but it’s not expensive for such revolutionary tech.
So the question isn’t if ordinary people can exert copyright over their content, they absolutely can.
The reason people seem unaware of this is because the crux is that other then a rare exception no ordinary person can sue a megaorg like google or meta and win. For mostly trying to find a literal army of lawyers and corrupt bureaucrats would be mental health suicide.
That’s exactly how capitalism likes it and thats how they stay on top in a position to lobby lawmakers, which is yet another thing you are definitely legally allowed to do as an individual.
Without additional information that seems more likely but its at least portrayed here as a real display.
It would still be a very interesting idea to rather make everything a display make everything a zero energy AR surface but then we need convenient mainstream AR wearables.
This channel has been uploaded vids of these screens for 8 months now. Is there some more tangible info on how these came about?
I don’t think you can diy this in a garage?
Does this mean if they try to ban other books, lets say about abortion all you need to do to guarantee it Doesn’t get censored is included a gay part?
That would be the loophole to really piss em off :p
EDIT: “prevents libraries from removing books “based solely on the viewpoint, content, message, idea, or opinion conveyed.” Instead, content curation will be managed by “a licensed library media specialist, an individual with a master’s degree in library sciences or library and information sciences, or a professional librarian or person with extensive library collection management experience."
Still though please can we turn non lgbt books into having a completely unnecessary lgbt subplot just because it would be funny. I am not even gay :p
Huh, thats weird. Your chatgpt output looks just like a google result page.
Inspirational demo provided by claude ai NOT A REAL REPORT
While mildly entertaining i doubt if anyone would really read such in full as a real article.
Editorial Report: Trump’s Debate Announcement Raises Eyebrows
Former President Donald Trump took to his social media platform, Truth Social, to announce an upcoming debate with Vice President Kamala Harris. The announcement, however, was far from a straightforward press release, instead serving as a microcosm of Trump’s combative political style and ongoing feuds with the media and his political opponents.
Debate Details Amid Political Jabs
Trump claims to have reached an agreement for a debate with Harris, scheduled for September 10th in Philadelphia, to be broadcast on ABC. However, the former president couldn’t resist taking a swipe at the network, labeling it “ABC FAKE NEWS” and describing it as “the nastiest and most unfair newscaster in the business.” This continued antagonism towards mainstream media outlets has been a hallmark of Trump’s political career and appears unabated.
The debate rules, according to Trump, will mirror those of a previous CNN debate. In what seems to be a dig at President Biden, Trump suggests these rules “seemed to work out well for everyone except, perhaps, Crooked Joe Biden.” The use of the pejorative nickname “Crooked” for Biden indicates that Trump is maintaining his strategy of assigning unflattering monikers to his political rivals.
Format and Fairness Concerns
Trump emphasizes that the debate will be “stand up,” with candidates prohibited from using notes or “cheat sheets.” This framing implies a preference for spontaneity and perhaps a criticism of prepared remarks. He also claims to have received assurances from ABC about the debate’s fairness, specifically mentioning that neither side will receive questions in advance. The parenthetical “(No Donna Brazile!)” likely refers to the 2016 controversy where Brazile, then a CNN contributor, was accused of providing debate questions to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Jabs at Harris and Negotiations in Progress
In a particularly pointed comment, Trump alleges that Harris declined a September 4th debate on Fox News. He frames this as potential indecisiveness, stating the date remains open in case Harris “changes her mind or, Flip Flops, as she has done on every single one of her long held and cherished policy beliefs.” This accusation of inconsistency is a common political attack, though the sweeping nature of Trump’s claim is characteristically hyperbolic.
Trump also mentions the possibility of a third debate on NBC, again using the term “FAKE NEWS” to describe the network. He states that this potential debate “has not been agreed to by the Radical Left,” a term he repeatedly uses to refer to his Democratic opponents.
Analysis
Trump’s announcement, while ostensibly about a debate agreement, serves multiple purposes. It’s a platform for him to:
The confrontational tone and use of nicknames and labels (“Comrade Kamala Harris,” “Crooked Joe Biden,” “Radical Left”) are consistent with Trump’s communication style throughout his political career. This approach continues to energize his base while potentially alienating moderate voters.
It’s worth noting that as of our last update, there has been no confirmation from Harris’s team or the Democratic Party about this debate. Given the unorthodox nature of the announcement and Trump’s history of making unverified claims, it would be prudent to seek corroboration from other sources before considering this debate as confirmed.
The announcement concludes with an all-caps “GOD BLESS AMERICA!” – a patriotic flourish that has become a standard sign-off in Trump’s communications, possibly aimed at reinforcing his image as a patriotic figure.
As the 2024 election cycle heats up, this announcement, regardless of its accuracy, signals that Trump intends to maintain the confrontational and unorthodox communication style that defined his previous campaigns and presidency.