More people will bring a lot of interesting problems we don’t have right now. First and probably most important is money. High intensity traffic and storage is exponentially more expensive with increased load, and I don’t know if it’s possible to afford it without some kind of monetization
insecure and share data with law enforcement
[citation needed]
an armed minority is harder to oppress
With the level of police militarisation, I wouldn’t be so sure. If police murders a bunch of queer people, it’s still a pr disaster and so it’s something they want to avoid. But a bunch of queer people with guns in one place is called a compound or even possibly headquarters and they’re allowed to deploy tanks and flamebombs against it.
In the escalatory war wins the side that is legally allowed to own tanks and deploy flamethrowing robots. Every time.
There is an old Russian joke.
Son asks his father, “Daddy, I’ve heard the price of vodka went up, does it mean you will be drinking less?”, and the father answers “No, son, you will be eating less”.
Shaming people, who pretend to have moral quandaries but then immediately acting to worsen everything they pretend to care about, however, is the only objectively correct behaviour.
Absolutely nothing vague about what I said. Authoritarian regimes are very careful about their external image and employ a lot of propaganda to maintain it. The closer a piece of mefia to the authoritarian regime the more lies there will be.
To address inevitable whataboitism, it’s not their exclusive deal, oligarchs and wannabe oligarchs also lie on the internet, but it’s not the point
There is a fundamental difference between a chatroom and a social media feed. The second one is painfully easy to hijack to do some damage, the first one not so much.
Daamn, it’s so nice that nobody invented lying on Chinese internet yet, otherwise shit would be so embarrassing
You assume that those numbers are people who are left leaning, but as the research from the last election cycle showed, almost 80% are either consistently voting or consistently don’t, and the rest are roughly evenly spread.
It’s more like stopping the construction crew from painting your house a colour you hate. Which sounds more reasonable
Believe it or not, there was Internet communication before social media.
Isn’t a guy on your money had a child from an underage slave or am I mistaking him with some other slave holding hero of the country?
When you do live streaming there is no time for backup, it either works or not. Better than nothing, that’s for sure, but also maybe marginally better than whatever we had 10 years ago
I unfortunately don’t know the specific names of the models, I will comment additionally if I will not forget to ask people who spun up the models themselves.
The difference might be that live vs recorded stuff, I don’t know.
Last election was one of the active ones. The people who didn’t participate are roughly those who never do. If the prospect of one more Trump presidency didn’t motivate them, they are truly, totally non existant as citizens and frankly as members of society. Their voices exists only as an annoying buzz on social media, and their opinion don’t matter, newer were.
People who don’t vote and people who can’t vote aren’t important because their voices don’t exist. They can shit themselves on twitter any day of the week until the heat death of the universe, their opinion don’t matter because so far democracy happens in the real world and not on twitter and reddit.
Relax, they didn’t write a new way of doing magic, they integrated a solution from the market.
I don’t know what the new BMW car they introduce this year is capable of, but I know for a fact it can’t fly.
There is a hard limitation on LLM, it doesn’t and by definition can not have a criteria for truth, and unless something completely new emerges, it will never replace a junior, really. Some managers can be convinced that it did, but that will be a lie and the company that believes it will suffer.
It can transform some junior jobs for sure, some people might need to relearn some practices, there will probably be some shift in some methods, but unless something fundamentally new will appear, there is no way LLM will meaningfully replace meaningful amount of people
The technology is nowhere near being good though. On synthetic tests, on the data it was trained and tweeked on, maybe, I don’t know.
I corun an event when we invite speakers from all over the world, and we tried every way to generate subtitles, all of them run on the level of YouTube autogenerated ones. It’s better than nothing, but you can’t rely on it really.
Doesn’t seem unreasonable to me. And more importantly doesn’t seem insecure to me.