Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)B

Buffalox

@ Buffalox @lemmy.world

Posts
2
Comments
2356
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • President Trump Lost This War

    Jump

  • The United States is emerging weaker — militarily, diplomatically and economically — and will pay strategic costs for years to come.

    Seems to me USA lost it more than Trump did. For Trump this will soon be irrelevant for obvious reasons.Trump lost this for USA more than himself.

  • Nvidia CEO: Society needs new 'new social norms' in the age of AI. I used to play in the streets. When cars came along, you obviously can’t play in the streets now

    Jump

  • Is he going senile since he wants to play in the streets again?

  • Quote of the day by Apple CEO Tim Cook: 'If you put a key under the mat for the cops, a burglar can find it, too' — a stark warning on threats to undermine privacy

    Jump

  • We have an easy peasy solution to that.We will just make it illegal for burglars to look under the mat.And if they do look under the mat, we will also make it illegal fro them to take the key.Finally we will also make it illegal for burglars to use the key.

    See there an absolutely bullet proof solution, so why does the tech industry continue to claim this is a bad idea?As a politician I simply can't understand why they are so contrary to this idea that will increase safety for everybody!!

    /s (just in case)

  • Medieval Unboxing [Toothybj]

    Jump

  • Yes I have, I once saw a Kellogg advertisement in the 90's, claiming that Kelogg is part of a healthy breakfast, obviously that advertisement was quickly banned and Kelogg was issued a fine form misleading advertisement.Generally I just assume American advertisements to be misleading, but that isn't too much an issue in civilized countries.But for more than 20 years now, I don't see advertising at all. Except when visiting friends and family, because they are too stupid to get around it.And of courser also except when I do my daily shopping, because the boxing itself is also kind of advertising, but it can't be false, because that's illegal here, because I live in a civilized country.

  • Medieval Unboxing [Toothybj]

    Jump

  • Absolutely next best thing to unboxing videos, except we don't have moving pictures, and the requirement of being able to read limit the audience by a great deal.

  • Medieval Unboxing [Toothybj]

    Jump

  • Unboxing is probably the most groundbreaking cultural breakthrough humanity has seen for at least a decade.Now people can see what's in the box without having to buy it. Before unboxing videos, we had to rely on pictures and descriptions.Now we have MOVING pictures and descriptions.

    Example before unboxing videos:I wonder what's in this package that says "electric cooker"?Surprise surprise, there's an actual electric cooker, that matches the pictures and specifications on the box!!

    After unboxing videos:Just as was shown on the unboxing video, the electric cooker matches the pictures and specifications on the box!!

  • Trillionaire Elon Musk's Destruction of USAID Takes Food Aid From Millions Facing Deadly Hunger

    Jump

  • 10% tax on everything he owns would be like 50% of his personal wealth.

    That doesn't make any sense? 10% tax on all he owns is 10% of his personal wealth.Obviously all he owns = His personal wealth.

    But yeah, we can definitely do better than 0%

    Definitely, 1% should be a no-brainer, 2% would be better. 😀

  • Trump Parties While America Surrenders

    Jump

  • Funny why you thought of the money first?

    Wow massive downvotes, as if people never even heard of a Freudian slip.Clearly money entered the mind before lives!!

  • Microsoft's new Outlook takes 10 seconds to do what Outlook Classic does instantly on Windows

    Jump

  • Exactly the same as when Microsoft ditched Outlook express.

  • Three Inverse Laws of AI - Susam Pal

    Jump

  • you have to have some awareness of what AI even is or you are at risk of being harmed.

    Yes that's how it is, but that should not be the case, AI should legally be considered like asking expert advice, like asking a lawyer or a doctor, those are not considered risks, because they have legal responsibility for their advice. The same must be the case for AI, AI must have similar legal responsibility covered by the company offering the AI service.

    If AI responses can't be trusted and are false information, it's not a service but a disservice. It can never be the case that normal users should have particular skills to use an AI service. That's legally a slippery slope we should absolutely refuse to allow.

  • Three Inverse Laws of AI - Susam Pal

    Jump

  • I never read any "fake" Asimov stories not actually being written by Asimov himself.I have however read everything Asimov wrote, I think he was an amazing author, and I love how well thought out his stories are.

    Is there any particular reason to read these Roger MacBride Allen stories?I must admit my interest in reading has diminished, because I find mostly everything I read has become banal and without any new thoughts.

  • Three Inverse Laws of AI - Susam Pal

    Jump

  • Thanks for the good constructive response. 👍

    a company that provides unreviewed AI output must ensure users are aware that output can be harmful or incorrect.

    I agree, and then we should require such warnings for every AI response, kind of like we have on cigarettes.Meaning the responsibility to warn about harmful effects is up to the company offering the service, not for the user to assume.

    I think responsibility comes once you present AI output to something who doesn’t consent or understand AI.

    Which means 99.9% of the users currently using AI, or unknowingly exposed to it through services that use AI without it being clear.

  • BYD Secretly Develops Humanoid Robot Codename 'Yao-Shun-Yu' as Auto Giants Race Into Embodied AI

    Jump

  • I wonder if Elon Musk is laughing his ass off about BYD making robots, like he did about their EV cars?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9ftbRWqkj0

    In China BYD is now selling 5 times more EV cars than Tesla!!https://autovista24.autovistagroup.com/news/what-was-the-best-selling-ev-brand-in-china-in-2025/

    Now Musk claims his stupid AI and Robots that aren't even competitive today, will be worth billions or rather trillions in the future.My guess is the competition will walk all over him in every field, because Tesla is lagging behind now even on EV where they had a solid head start. Elon Musk does not have a head start on robotics and AI, and I doubt Neither SpaceX (XAI) or Shitter (Grok) or Tesla (Optimus) will ever make a profit on any of their AI products.

    Maybe BYD won't either, but I give them a way better chance than anything Musk related.

  • Three Inverse Laws of AI - Susam Pal

    Jump

  • The basic idea that there are abiously laws for humans too is fine.But these are misunderstood, and are designed to put blame on users instead of the AI and the companies behind.

    It is well known that Asimov's laws were flawed.

    What? No they aren't!! Those laws are 70 years old, and are surprisingly well designed, and the concept still stands, which is why they are still so famous! The claim that they are flawed is a very bad start, and very noticeably the author does not describe in what way they are flawed, and also no, Asimov's stories do NOT reveal flaws in these laws, on the contrary they demonstrate the necessity of them. Asimov's stories demonstrate that responsibility of AI is a requirement, otherwise innocent people or even humanity will get hurt.

    The inverse laws the article suggest:

    Humans must not anthropomorphise AI systems.

    This is mostly irrelevant. Judgement must be based on the facts, just like with any other type of professional advice.I feel like 2+2 should be five, is essentially nonsensical, but still it is impossible to not have human users reflect on their own emotions when being advised, whether it's a human, a book or an AI.

    Humans must not blindly trust the output of AI systems.

    This should seem obvious. But it completely removes the responsibility from the AI, and fails to account for the human factor that if the AI was right 9 times in a row, it is very human to think it is probably also right the 10th time, exactly as with a human advisor. You can't make it a requirement of humans to automatically be skeptical of advice put forward with sophisticated language and argumentation that seems identical to a qualified authority and expert. And then require that we make the research manually afterwards. What would the point of the AI be then? We might as well simply skip the AI step altogether by that logic. Which might actually not be such a bad idea. 😋

    Humans must remain fully responsible and accountable for consequences arising from the use of AI systems.

    This sounds like blame is fully on the user, not the company responsible for the AI.When services are offered to non specialists and ordinary people, the company behind the "product" must have responsibility of the quality of the product for the services they offer, exactly like with other products. Guidance to a teenager to commit suicide cannot be blamed on the user, and guidance to commit acts of terror makes the AI an accomplice, and the company behind such an AI must be exactly as responsible for the act as if a human had been an accomplice.

    This looks like a whitewash of AI responsibility, and this is exactly the last thing we would want to become a legal norm, a world of irresponsible AI where the users carry all the blame.Guidelines maybe, laws no.

    Edit:

    I'm surprised this is downvoted, since when did Lemmy become pro irresponsible AI? Laying the burden of responsibility on ordinary users instead of the companies behind!Absolutely "don't be stupid" is what we should all strive for, but you simply can't make it a "law" that people must stop being stupid. An AI giving advice that obviously harm people should absolutely be illegal, exactly as Asimov suggested in his 3 laws of Robotics.

  • Trump threatens to ‘take back’ DC if democratic socialist is elected as mayor

    Jump

  • You are not arguing your point well enough to make it plausible.Maybe if you arguments had actual facts, that had actual sources, but it's impossible to spend time on every crazy conspiracy story that cross social media.If there is no evidence provided, Occam's razor tells us they are probably unfounded.Obviously it's not up to me to substantiate your claim. Having to drag the name out of you, and you still fail on the dates, shows that you are not strong on basic facts.Furthermore one anecdotal story from the 70's does not show a trend, and has little bearing on the political landscape half a century later.

  • Trump threatens to ‘take back’ DC if democratic socialist is elected as mayor

    Jump

  • You forgot the year:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gough_Whitlam

    21st Prime Minister of Australia In office 5 December 1972 – 11 November 1975

    So maybe the reversal of those policies were caused by the oil crisis that started in 1973?The late 70's were shit economically in all of the developed world including Australia.There is probably no conspiracy here, just unfortunate timing. Also it was half a century ago, so not that relevant today, unless you can show a trend.

  • Trump threatens to ‘take back’ DC if democratic socialist is elected as mayor

    Jump

  • Bullshit.

    One year, in Australia, a prime minister was elected

    Why not write the year and the name of the prime minister.Your story sounds completely made up.

  • U.S. and Iran to close deal within a day, Trump says, but Tehran yet to confirm

    Jump

  • Paywall

  • There's still no point in gigabit broadband

    Jump

  • I have made the measurements, and at 500 Mbit/s I actually got a bit more than 5x what I had at 100 Mbit/s. Actually my 500 Mbit connection ran as 550, because the rated speed here is the guaranteed speed of the connection. So the only limitation is the server at the other end.

    It is true however that 1 Gbit/s didn't quite double the 500 Mbit/s speed, Actual measured facts beat speculation.But your examples of steeply diminishing returns are not true.