celdon25

38 ms·

421.
by celdon25 3y ago
You're not wrong (but I dispute the fairy tale characterization you attributed to my comment). Everyone's life priorities and capabilities are different. Occasionally over the years I have had enough disposable income and free tim
422.
by celdon25 3y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230
423.
by celdon25 3y ago
Then put up a donation button. We're not talking about millions here
424.
by celdon25 3y ago
I remember the days when lowering the barrier to entry was considered to be a safe investment since it would pay for itself through increased project interest (and more contributions by the community). Now it is apparently seen as "wor
425.
by celdon25 3y ago
Why does there need to be a business model? Can't people contribute to society for its own sake? Comments like this are implicitly hostile to that idea, and that is "The Issue" with our society, generally speaking.
426.
by celdon25 3y ago
Then find another platform that doesn't artificially incentivize longer videos filled with crap. And I'm not even talking about the advertising, which is easy to skip. I'm talking about the fact that videos don't get to
427.
by celdon25 3y ago
Great, but I'm skeptical of any of these "breakthroughs" ever seeing any added value for those who actually need these. Filed under [in mice].
428.
by celdon25 3y ago
I guess that explains why the quality in its search results has been trending downward for me.
429.
by celdon25 3y ago
> When you say explaining reasoning is different from citing sources, why are you talking about citing sources? Because that's what I was referring to and you moved the goalposts. Sources are a necessary part of the knowledge metada
430.
by celdon25 3y ago
> Can humans answer that? Yes, it's called a citation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation
431.
by celdon25 3y ago
This is a different argument. Explaining reasoning != citing sources. The latter is a solved problem if not for the implicit obfuscation in the LLM data (though that also depends on the complexity of the reasoning used to derive the respons
432.
by celdon25 3y ago
First, you tell me why you think it's okay for strong AI systems to be built from and toward the ethos of "Believe everything you hear on the Internet"
433.
by celdon25 3y ago
Until AI can consistently and correctly answer to “where did you learn that?”, it is fundamentally defective as a technology and should absolutely be out of the question for attempts at AGI.
434.
by celdon25 3y ago
Because they don't have a second amendment? The comparison you should be paying attention to however is the rate of mass shootings within the US per year. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/10/mass
435.
by celdon25 3y ago
> Marijuana is simply too negligible of an issue It's not that simple and not everyone agrees with the above statement. Harm reduction is not really emphasized with marijuana, yet it's increasingly necessary as concentrations i
436.
by celdon25 3y ago
How often do you actually see news of "research breakthroughs" panning out as far as things you can actually buy later on? Chinese or not.
437.
by celdon25 3y ago
> some good free software to render it Not going to share the name of it? :)
438.
by celdon25 4y ago
I didn't find anything interesting about Mastodon. It felt like just another Twitter to me. I don't care about some random dude's cat pictures or their takes on politics or what they had for lunch. Is there something I'm
439.
by celdon25 4y ago
Orion’s Arm was my introduction to Transhumanism and AGI in 2003. I was still in high school. Thanks for sharing this.
440.
by celdon25 4y ago
> under federal labeling rules Anyone know what the specific regulation is? Seems the article missed an opportunity to provide actionable information instead of the usual doomsaying
441.
by celdon25 4y ago
What was the point of your previous comment then?
442.
by celdon25 4y ago
Don’t the Nazis use Gab? This is a post about Parler.
443.
by celdon25 4y ago
The replies seem to be full of low-quality guesses, which is disappointing to see on this site (assuming they were not using sarcasm). I’ll try to do slightly better and link the actual press release and include the official statement. Hop
444.
by celdon25 4y ago
I’m glad you posted this, that never would have crossed my mind.
445.
by celdon25 4y ago
The actual problem is that travesties of this scale are allowed to happen on Google’s watch for so long, despite the Orwellian grip it has on deciding what apps are allowed to be listed. A good example of why that system needs to be reforme
446.
by celdon25 4y ago
This hits close to home, but unfortunately Occam’s Razor will get applied. It’s an unfortunate reality that engineers (not their managers) are responsible for knowing how to handle themselves in the worst of situations so they don’t become
447.
by celdon25 4y ago
No changes needed, it grabbed my attention and stood out. You clearly know what you are talking about. But assuming your goal is to make a positive impact in the industry, managers need to be able to read this and get actionable takeaways.
448.
by celdon25 4y ago
Did you read the article? This wasn’t someone driving a car across the border.
449.
by celdon25 4y ago
https://www.lesswrong.com/tag/ai-success-models
450.
by celdon25 4y ago
> Even if AI is less dangerous than nuclear destruction It's not. At least with the nukes there's a chance of resetting civilization.

More ›