Also known as snooggums on midwest.social and kbin.social.
You can have a job and still do the things you think you would have done as a child. It isn’t like 1/3 of childhood days aren’t taken up by school, not even counting homework.
I had so much more time as a young adult than I had in school. Except for summer break I guess.
Choosing not to roll dice avoids needing to follow the outcome. That was a smart decision on the door knocking!
Yeah, people are frequently terrible at understanding context so it shouldn’t be surprising that a computer has difficulty too.
There are actually a lot of specialized applications of neural network based computing being used for science, but they don’t get the flashy headlines because they are a tool. Those projects use it to find things to focus on narrowing down what people should look into first for confirmation, like ancient settlement patterns, stars that might have planets, and other things where patterns exist but are hard to see.
Some examples are listed here at a high level. In all cases the ai leads to humans confirming and then working from there, it isn’t the end result on its own. https://medium.com/@jeyadev_needhi/uncovering-the-past-how-ai-is-transforming-archaeology-38ded420896d
It is hard because they chose to make it hard by trying to do far too many things at the same time and sell it as a complete product.
Yes, the tradeoff between constrained randomization and accurately vomiting back the information it was fed is going to be difficult as long as it it designed to be interacted with as if it was a human who can know the difference.
It could be handled by having clearly defined ways of conveying whether the user wants factual or randomized output, but that would shatter the veneer of being intelligent.
This is because AI is not aware of context due to not being intelligent.
What is called creative is really just randomization within the constraints of the design. That reduces accuracy, because of the randomization. If the ‘creativity’ is reduced, it becomes more accurate because it is no longer adding changes.
Using words like creativity, self sabotage, hallucinations, etc. all make it seem like AI is far more advanced than it actually is.
The mother didn’t put the symbol on the telephone pole, it was the work of the grandmother’s cult. The mother is not to blame for sending the kid with the brother to the party or what happened there, it was all orchestrated by the cult.
If sticking to the outcome of an extremely unlikely series of die roles is being too hard, your players are playing the wrong game.
If we can’t call them out on their bullshit then we are placating them.
Cool, cool. Let’s placate the bullies and hope for the best!
When their alt right beliefs bite them in the ass they don’t change their mind.
What kind of careful approach do you think is going to magically work? Why would any approach make anything better or worse when they won’t change due to direct negative impacts to themselves from their own actions.
How is the outcome any different when the end result is them continuing to hold the same opinions contrary to evidence?
I have changed my opinions by being exposed to new knowledge and different opinions multiple times, so I assume it could happen to other people too.
If they won’t change their mind, is doubling down any different than continuing to believe what they already believe?
Also the infrastructure for getting rid of those bags…
It is not technically entrapment because they aren’t police, but they are cosplaying as cops so the label gets the point across.
What we see in this article appears to abandon that sort of rigor to manufacture more opportunities to confront someone.
Aka entrapment.
Somebody should tell society their laws need to catch up with that decision!
How so?
It was factual and stated neutrally as far as I can tell.