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/)Z
Posts
1
Comments
88
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • You could also just add the udm=14 parameter to your search URL, which defaults to the "Web" tab of the results like so - easy enough to configure this to always be present in Firefox, and helps you avoid googling dozens of slurs a day as a bonus

    https://www.google.com/search?udm=14&q=hello+world

  • I read this whole thread thinking I was on /c/TheOnion, not /c/NotTheOnion, and thought the joke just went over your head.

    Wow, it's really not the Onion. What a headline. I gave the article a brief skim and it seems to be sarcasm-free.

  • This seems scammier than buying real estate in space

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Interstellar, not intergalactic

  • This classic xkcd led me down a long rabbit hole years after reading it that ended in the belief that the universe itself is an abstract instantiation of pure mathematics, and exists only in the sense that any such self-consistent mathematical structure must exist from its own point of view. I won't get into the details here because it'll turn into a long incoherent rant, but the general gist is that the idea in the comic should work - but then that the rocks themselves aren't even necessary: The fact that a universe can exist is enough for it to exist, even if no one ever simulates it. Just like the question "What is the 10(10100)th prime number?" exists and has a definite answer, even though nobody will ever and can never calculate it, the answer to "What does a universe, with these initial conditions, and these laws of physics, look like at t = 13.7 billion years?" has an answer too, and it looks like you reading this comment.

  • Ironically... so did I 🙃 But I hand-verified everything it said, and adjusted the quotes.

    • “AI should serve as a scaffold for cognitive construction rather than a substitute.”
    • “...the teacher’s role is shifting from knowledge transmission to instructional design and behavioral facilitation… Teachers must develop digital literacy and data fluency while acting as safeguards against over‑automation, ensuring that human judgment and educational values mediate AI adoption.”
    • “...while AI offers efficiency and feedback advantages, traditional teaching remains essential for tasks requiring cultural interpretation, discourse depth, and emotional connection. A blended model—AI for repetitive or procedural tasks and teachers for critical discourse—appears most effective.”

    This study explicitly does not advocate for replacing teachers with AI, and repeatedly cautions against doing so

  • Our internal slack channels contain more and more AI-written posts, which makes me think: Thank you for throwing this wall of text on me and n other people. Now, n people need to extract the relevant information, so you are able to “save time” not writing the text yourself. Nice!!!

    I think this is one of your best bets as far as getting a real policy change. Bring it up, mention that posts like that may take less time to "write", but that they're almost always obnoxiously verbose, contain paragraphs that say essentially nothing, and take far longer to read than a hand-typed message would. The argument that one person is saving time at the expense of dozens (?) of people losing time may carry a lot of weight, especially if these bosses are in and read the same Slack channel.

    Past that I'd just let things go as they are, and take every opportunity to point out when AI made a problem, or made a problem more difficult to solve (while downplaying human-created problems).

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • My take on their comment was that they know this but consider it their 'religion' anyways because they don't understand the process and so, in the absence of true understanding, take it on faith alone that the process actually works out

    But the evidence is all around us even if you don't understand the processes themselves: Science built us a moon landing, religion built us the dark ages

  • Why not? FDR had a podcast.

  • "All issues have only one sensible side and the rest are insensible" is not the takeaway from their comment. Some issues have multiple sensible sides. Other issues might have one sensible sides and several nonsense sides. All their last comment did was provide an example of the latter. They seem to take no stance on what type of issue their first example is.

  • I think most people missed the point of my comment as an ironic statement mocking the hypocrisy of the democratic establishment in this race.

  • Vote blue no matter who.

  • not with that attitude

  • More from the same set

  • I can't read the whole article because it's paywalled, but the first two paragraphs confirm what everyone already knew: The author purposely led ChatGPT into weird occult topics, then acted scandalized when ChatGPT got weird and occult.

  • I thought 4chan shut down permanently like 2 months ago?

  • What's your earliest dream you can still remember?

  • Programming @programming.dev

    Why is pynput typing incorrect output, but only on Linux?