13415

7 ms·

31.
by 13415 4mo ago
What validation databases and where can you get access to them?
32.
by 13415 4mo ago
I'm glad I don't use Claude.
33.
by 13415 4mo ago
I use copy & paste with a pro subscription. I guess I'm a bit behind in terms of tool use but it works great for me.
34.
by 13415 4mo ago
It's the future of warfare and it will sink the inhibition threshold for starting wars of aggression further.
35.
by 13415 4mo ago
Or Apple could just fix these issues.
36.
by 13415 4mo ago
As long as you're human, you don't have a substantially different notion of trust than I do. It's part of human psychology. We had to evolve it as social beings. I've seen very ad hoc CS papers on "trust", thou
37.
by 13415 4mo ago
One thing is sure, pinning trust on trust chains down from Root Certificate Authorities is fundamentally incompatible with our notion of trust and an almost absurd idea to start with. Most people using a browser don't even know any per
38.
by 13415 4mo ago
The problem is that the current trust model is totally untrustworthy.
39.
by 13415 4mo ago
Personally, I think Reticulum is the parallel Internet. It could even replace the Internet Protocol, and whatever the IP protocol connects is in my view the Internet.
40.
by 13415 4mo ago
> IOW if we don't know what consciousness is, how can we call LLMs conscious when we haven't seen even the barest intermediary steps towards our nascent concept of consciousness first? We stipulate that other human beings are
41.
by 13415 5mo ago
The biggest and maybe only relevant difference is that one of them works evidence-based and the other one doesn't.
42.
by 13415 5mo ago
I don't disagree with much you've said, the only thing that bothered me after having worked for 20 years at university is the lack of realism of your views about scientific practice. Scientists have to deal with politics a lot, an
43.
by 13415 5mo ago
I really don't get you stance. Of course, you can make more fine-grained distinctions and that's fine. You can claim that medical doctors act as medical scientists when they conduct studies and as doctors (consultants) in their pr
44.
by 13415 5mo ago
You're nitpicking. Medicine is concerned with what's good and bad for someone's health. Medical doctors literally advise their patients on that and evaluate the effects of actions with respect to what's good and what&#x2
45.
by 13415 5mo ago
So medicine is not a science because it's concerned with what's "good" and what's "bad" for someone's health? I find this kind of argument principally flawed. Many sciences are concerned with the cons
46.
by 13415 6mo ago
You're essentially saying "Don't trust Google at all and ask your local government to put pressure on Google" and I agree with that but you frame it in a needlessly apologist way. If a company makes a promise and breaks
47.
by 13415 6mo ago
Interesting, this seems to license forms of affirmative action that are unconstitutional in Germany.
48.
by 13415 6mo ago
Such laws are unconstitutional in Germany. I'd be interested in which country you live in and an example of such a law.
49.
by 13415 7mo ago
It is the feature "Allow GitHub to use my data for AI model training" that needs to be disabled. Right? Or am I missing some trick / dark GUI pattern? Just want to make sure.
50.
by 13415 7mo ago
I want "the system" to neither push people towards healthy nor towards unhealthy behavior if by "push" you mean "force by law." I want a system that maximizes personal freedom and individual responsibility. I&#
51.
by 13415 7mo ago
Not only that, in my opinion the many positive reactions to this decision are a sign of a decline of personal responsibility and a desire of people to be managed by the government and treated like cattle. Blaming everyone else but themselve
52.
by 13415 7mo ago
This article is a crazy sounding and very unsystematic rant. It sounds as if some AI hurt this author personally somehow. What I find most annoying about it is that the author constantly mixes up consequences of using AI with perceived or r
53.
by 13415 7mo ago
The alleged inability of a company like Google to create an operating system that makes banking apps secure while allowing users to install whatever they like is very implausible. Android apps are already sandboxed and have fine-grained acc
54.
by 13415 7mo ago
Is there any news about how Gemini fares in this debate? I suppose they're fine with total mass surveillance ("we already do that anyway") and creating kill bots but is there any official stance? I find it hard to believe Alp
55.
by 13415 7mo ago
We can't. That would require a carefully conducted cost-benefit analysis of potential outcomes including the costs and benefits of not starting it, with estimates for short-term (3 years), ten years, and twenty year outcomes. Such a st
56.
by 13415 7mo ago
I understand that you're making some political statement about the voters but it has to be pointed out the mental health of a president is a problem or not a problem independently of what the voters think. Sorry for pointing out the ob
57.
by 13415 7mo ago
Useless? Where do they expect the senior engineers to come from in the future?
58.
by 13415 7mo ago
Let's keep it short, I'll give you the last word if you want. 1. The US "intervention" in WW2 was fully justified because the US was attacked. It's also justified to help another country that is attacked, for exampl
59.
by 13415 7mo ago
> Can you clarify the "moral point of view", please? The moral point of view is that a war of aggression violates the sovereignty of the people in the attacked country. The aggressor country's officials are not elected b
60.
by 13415 7mo ago
Both from an international rights and from a moral point of view you're objectively wrong. This is not even worth a discussion. The fact that you need cite a terrorist attack from 1983 to justify an illegal war of aggression in 2026 in

More ›