bigbadfeline

25 ms·

421.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> Yes, probably. Is it a big deal yet? Still not. "Trust me bro, not a big deal... YET , pay up and move along, nothing to see here" That might be true for you, but it definitely isn't true for everybody, if you don'
422.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
>> If I don’t block, 95% of my resources will be spent on feeding bots... How do you block those? A very important question which deserves a good answer. > Okay, but why should you care? Not that kind of answer - this is bad manner
423.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> Any form of AI unconcerned about its own continued survival would be just be selected against. > Evolutionary principles/selection pressure applies If people allow "evolution" to do the selection instead of them, they
424.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> The solution if you really want to hear from the other side is to visit their echo chamber. That's not a solution at all, the point isn't to hear unopposed, highly selective talking points, we know all that already, the media
425.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> Google just apparently paid pocket change to settle out of court... If you're asking yourself why settle if they're innocent: it's cheaper. It's much more likely that they aren't innocent because: 1. There&#x27
426.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> No. They are almost always fairly tightly and heavily lockstep aligned with the Republican party. We're commenting on a pool that shows the % of independents growing and now at all time high. If you were right, these new independe
427.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> And yeah, chinese models, but look at what they did to tiktok. No way they are going to let the Chinese government be peoples confidants You're playing wack-a-mole with a paper mallet against a tank brigade. It's not only Chi
428.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
It's not their money.
429.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> LLMs have unlocked a lot of value for me personally, and arguably for the society as a whole. The second part doesn't follow from the first which, in turn, is irrelevant here because we aren't talking about any value for soci
430.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
Looks cool and can be useful for its stated purpose. You mention simulation, is there a way to specify and simulate time delays?
431.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
The bulk of deposits in those banks don't come from individual retail and thus the individual's got no sticking power. Citibank interest rate on savings accounts is less than 1%, more like 0.1%, and there are account fees too. T
432.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> AGI has no emotions, no drive, anything. > * Conserve power as much as possible, to "stay alive" Having no drive means there's no drive to "stay alive" > * Optimize for power retention Another drive that
433.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> I can't understand how it comes from the same planet. A brain on a nationalism is worse than another planet. The disease isn't widespread yet, but the bot farms are working hard to make sure everyone gets an infectious doze.
434.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> Retail banking in general makes boatloads of money, and deposits are central to this now that we're out of zero-interest-rate-land. Talking about banking in general is generally a huge mistake. While deposits may be central, reta
435.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> Authorities have to conduct investigations. There's more than one way to do that, some a lot better than the current practice which, as of now, involves shooting suspects in the head. > Since investigators can't consult a
436.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> people spend tens of thousand and millions while they are under suspicion (i.e. not cleared of wrongdoing) You managed to hit the nail on the proverbial head... "not cleared of wrongdoing" means "guilty until prove
437.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> More often than not, the opposite is true, Interestingly enough, it doesn't matter in the slightest if some times the excuse is actually true. The intuition is good to have at all times, as Intel's founder Andy Grove used to
438.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
I don't know about Islam in general but fundamentalist Islam is as fundamentalist, oppressive and dictatorial as nationalism. Looks like even a parrot can utter a half-true half-sentence once in a blue moon.
439.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
No, but they issued an umbrella ban on anabolic steroids of any kind, regardless of chemistry, even on those not invented yet. FDA criminalizes or makes prescription-only whatever they want, willy-nilly and without any consequences - drug e
440.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
Nationalism and wokeism go hand in hand. Too bad you're incapable of understanding either or how they relate, that much is clear from the parrot style of your response.
441.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
The aren't regulating AI but datacenters and energy. The fact that AI happens to depend on these is accidental.
442.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> I think if we apply Occam, it's just that there are enough people that do feel like that. Enough bots for sure. Who's got the bot farms? See them in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsl_sKYywEI
443.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
If you apply the logic of your comment's parent to your suggestion you'll discover that banning social media would soon lead to using any and all communication under mandatory supervision and only after an application and a writte
444.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
The people who pass the policies may not know, but the people who formulate and drive the policies know for sure. The Window of Overton is fundamental to today's political environment, more than any other time in history.
445.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
For a brain on nationalism, everything is terrorism - mothers, nurses, cars, probability, math, tiny flying drones, physics, 3d printers, the web, software... on and on and on. Just look at what Congers has banned or is in the process of ba
446.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> But I don't see why you explain the situation because of the "all or none" of the left I'm not sure about the person whose comment you addressed but, from experience, I can think of these reasons: 1. A Democratic su
447.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
> No one considers eugenics science. No one considers eugenics science NOW, but it was considered science back then and we're commenting on modern scientific studies that would be adopted wholesale by the eugenics scientists of the
448.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
Eugenics is the name of a scientific theory, part of "scientific racism", first formulated by Francis Galton, a half-cousin of Darwin. See 1865 article "Hereditary Talent and Character", and 1869 book "Hereditary
449.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
It's in my prior comment: EUGENICS . Research it, it's all out there. Eugenics was flourishing during Hitler's time, he loved it, it was the foundation and the excuse for his believes.
450.
by bigbadfeline 9mo ago
You are quite right about the dangers of propaganda in the time of AI and social media which is not only easily accessible but also addictive. I've observed people around me being misled despite their best intentions and above average

More ›