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/)J
Posts
1
Comments
42
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • AI's tendency to hallucinate means that for it to be actually reliable, a human needs to double-check all of its output. If it is being used to acquire and convey information of any kind to the prompter, you might as well just skip the AI and find the information manually, as you'd have to do that anyway to validate what it told you.

    And AI hallucinations are a side effect of the fundamental way in which generative AI works - they will never be 100% accounted for. When an AI generates text, it is simply predicting what word is likely to come next based on its prompt in relation to its training data. While this predictive ability has become remarkably sophisticated within the last few years (more than I thought it ever would, tbh), it is still only a predictive text generator. It's not "translating," "understanding," or "comprehending" anything about whatever subject it has been asked about - it is merely predicting the likelihood of the next word in its response based on its training data.

  • should only be used for art

    No, churning out uncanny valley slop built on mass IP theft ain't it, either. Personally I think AI is best used for simulations and statistical models of engineering problems, where it can iteratively find optimized solutions faster and sometimes more accurately than humans. The focus on "generative AI" and LLMs trying to get computers to act like humans is incredibly pointless, IMO. Let computers do what computers are good at, and humans do what humans are good at.

  • I'm hoping for natural causes, tbh. If he's actually killed I don't even want to think about how much insane wanton violence the hardcore MAGA wing will commit in response.

  • Man, why did we stop doing the whole "calling Republicans weird" thing? It was really starting to get under their skins, especially when major Dems like Walz and such got in on it, but then it just kinda fizzled out...

  • Guarantee you he shaved most of his facial hair just before he went live, then finished the rest after he was done.

  • "Subtract 4 wishes"

  • Ohh, that's probably what it actually is

  • It looks like "Cream Blindness" to me, not that it makes any more sense...

  • Went into the article assuming they meant "Python class" in the sense of "an educational course on Python," and was quite confused by the assertion that some of their readers may want to consider not learning about Python...

  • See the thing about the Epstein thing is that we actually have evidence for it. "Trump staged the shooting" is baseless speculation.

  • If Trump doesn't know about it, how do they do the blood on the ear? Not even elite marksmen can reliably hit someone's ear at that distance without risking actually hitting their head. If it were fake blood, Trump would have to be in on it.

    And again, the shooter being right-wing almost entirely negated the propaganda advantage the GOP could gain from it, it doesn't make sense for it to have been staged.

  • Let's leave the conspiracy theories to the far-right lunatics, please. The attempt killed an innocent bystander and the shooter was a right-winger. Even if they were cynical enough to stage the first part on purpose (and honestly, I wouldn't put it past them), the shooter being one of their own completely undermines the entire point of staging something like that to begin with.

    Besides, this administration is way too incompetent to keep a secret. With the way Trump has been blundering his way through the Epstein accusations, do you really think he could keep his mouth shut about staging an assassination attempt?

  • Goddammit, Nappa!

  • "Let them fight."

  • This is just a straightforward headline, how does this at all resemble anything from The Onion?

  • Now that you mention it, I think you might be right... My memory's not the best lol. From the other replies, it seems that the rarity of redeye these days comes from the timing of modern cameras' flash, not whether or not it uses film.

  • Wait, do digital cameras not do the red eye effect? Now that I think about it, I don't think I've seen a photo with red eye in it in a long time, but I had always assumed that was a consequence of the camera flash, not the film...

    Edit: TIL that camera redeye does come from the flash, but it hasn't been much of a thing these days because today's phones/cameras adjust the flash timing to compensate. Thanks for the replies!