Aerroon

The model is perfectly safe if nobody wants to use it!

It wouldn't work like that. Yes, there are some exceptions, but that wouldn't work for the vast majority of sites. The rest of them would end up being Facebook pages or Fandom wikis or similar.

It doesn't matter because simply having to pay any amount at all makes those sites inaccessible. Most of the world do not have credit cards.

But that aside, I think what we would see is a lot more Facebookification. A bunch of walled gardens that you pay a subscription for and then you get access to a whole slew of sites that FB buys up. Of course, they will make sure every site ends up toeing their line too.

>I am now of the opinion that web communities can survive in the same way arts and other liberal pursuits have always survived.

And the only 'users' of these websites will be rich people? Because the moment a paywall goes up on a website it becomes unusable for a large portion of the planet.

>which simply employs direct signals and ques from cognition and cognitive neuroscience to achieve this.

Does anyone actually do this or is this all post hoc rationalizations on why certain things work? My experience and understanding is that it's all just a bunch of "let's try lots of things and then do more of what did well". Ie it's the result of a crazy amount of iteration rather than "employing cognitive neuroscience".

The average score peaked in 2009 though.

https://www.oecd.org/en/data/dashboards/pisa-education-and-s...

Ie it's been dropping since 2009.

For mathematics and reading the large drop off is between 2018 and 2022.

Laws encode the preferences of a subset of society.

Some laws don't reflect what broader society thinks at all.

I could see its use - you could remotely activate them. Or activate them on a timer that isn't constrained by the functions of the coffee machine.

None of these are worth the spying that these companies do though.

Phone companies have been differentiating their models based on RAM for a decade. As have laptop and desktop sellers. The reason your router sometimes randomly crashes could very well be a result of not enough memory. The reason it takes such a long time to launch some programs repeatedly is because you don't have enough memory to cache it. Swapped from your browser to an app on your phone, but when you go back to the browser the site has reset and you lost everything you were working on? Not enough memory. Etc.

I think a lot of people care about the downstream effects of memory prices, but I agree with you that they may not realize that they happen because of memory prices.

I don't really understand why. Memory is a critical component of every computational device.

Could this technique be theoretically used to track users themselves? It would be quite ironic if the EU forced tech companies to implement extra tracking, wouldn't it?

Is https://www.europa.eu also malicious compliance? Because what on earth does the EU commission need a cookie pop up for?

And yet there it is. Maybe the law is flawed?

Can we take any of these "safety leaders" seriously though? I still remember "GPT2 is too dangerous to release".

I feel like we're too far into the crying wolf part. Basically none of the doom and gloom scenarios have come to pass. Instead, AI has gotten better at censoring itself.

The biggest AI safety risk is when an AI tells a police officer "he's the suspect" and the officer believes the AI without confirmation.

Is it that LLMs are weak with spatial reasoning (and memory) or is it that we are unusually good at it?

When I need to use a program I seldomly use I'm far more likely to remember where I need to click to open it than the word I need to search for to open it.

I did not expect this to just be a simple mistake, especially one that's been around for decades. Makes you wonder what other kind of basic facts are wrong.

In the age of satellites, computers, Google maps and the like you would think a mistake like this would be impossible to persist for so long.

>You cannot do proof without intuition hence, if you emphasize proof, intuition will take care of itself.

This isn't always the case. Our algebra (or analysis) course focused a lot on proofs for the exam. The result was that a lot of people learned the proofs by heart.

>Then that family member does not worry like you do worry.

Until they lose access to that account and then it becomes my problem to solve.

Indeed. Disney's cultural impact has been far greater.

They can have concrete definitions, but they conveniently don't have objective measures.

I don't need to do mental gymnastics, because the purpose of school is learning. If measures can't improve learning outcomes then they shouldn't be forced onto everyone.

I think they can match a human in critical thinking, but they can't match a human in coherence and meta-thinking. You can prompt an LLM to critically think of any idea you want and it's often able to do so, but it's rarely going to do that by itself.

Well, when they are a child their material gains are treated as yours, no? (Parents of child actors control the money etc.) And once they aren't anymore you aren't responsible for their misbehavior either (because they've become an adult).

If things go bad then the problem they cause is so huge that nobody is capable of taking responsibility for it. The following is an illustration of what I mean:

Eg imagine if one of these surveillance companies gets hacked. Personal data and the habits of a hundred million people get compromised.

The penalties for this should be enough to make everyone affected whole.

If your neighbor had a secret camera in your home - what would it take to make you whole? I imagine most people would be okay with like $50k (or some other large sum like that).

Are these surveillance companies ready to pay $50k per person? Hell no. 100M * 50k = $5 trillion.

Nobody can afford to pay that much. They either end up going bankrupt or are absolved of this responsibility. Either way, the people affected will not be made whole.

The way AI and copyright is handled paved the way for this. If you aren't considered the author because you used AI to some extent in making the work, then why would you assume the liabilities?

I've been saying since the start that AI is a tool that a human is using and should be treated as such. They should carry the responsibilities and the benefits. That way our stance would be consistent.

>You don't know what safeguarding and harm minimisation means, do you?

They're weasel words people use when their proposal doesn't actually work.

"It's totally making things better, you just can't see it in any objective stats."

Neither of those can be measured nor are they the reason we have schools in the first place. But they sound nice.

RuneScape is still one of the most popular MMOs out there. Last year it peaked at over 240k people online (concurrent users). It's nowhere near as popular as Roblox, Fortnite, and Minecraft but it's still doing very well.

I think what happened to the MMO genre is mobile games. They siphoned away the casual playerbase, so the old dynamics don't work as well anymore.

>It's tempting to think there's something like "the MMO" that's yet to be discovered, just like the arena shooter was.

It wouldn't surprise me if this was seasonal games like Diablo and Path of Exile. I've thought that seasons like in those games are the future of games like MMOs since they provide a natural hype cycle and jumping on point for the game.

But something entirely new would likely be AI related. Perhaps AI tools in the (far) future will allow so much decent content to be made that games can constantly offer new experiences. Like imagine a near limitless world to explore. That could be interesting.

>Score results aren’t alone sufficient proof about whether a ban on phones in school is successful or not.

If the scores aren't increasing as a result of it, then why are we doing it? We're clearly not asking for legitimate input from the people who are actually impacted by these policies (students).

Also, everything "enables" bullying. Bullying is not a problem that's caused by things. It won't go away when you take the things away.

>- Social media and doomscrolling without sufficient parental controls: Several OECD countries are already addressing this by introducing or considering restrictions on teenagers’ access to social media.

Surely this time banning things will improve test scores!

Even before you get to the scores in the report, it shows what percentage of students come from schools that have banned phones. There doesn't seem to be any obvious correlation where banning phones from school gives better results. Eg Estonia averaged 520 points with 26% of students from schools that ban phones. 88.9% of students were in NZ schools where cellphones are banned, but NZ averaged 511 points.

I think before we start banning more "random" things we should consider whether these bans actually produce results. Let the countries that are making these changes run their banning experiment and the rest of us should wait and see whether their scores meaningfully improve afterwards.

>Given the big gap between the east and the west

I thought the reason that China and Singapore were so far ahead of everyone else was that they were urban populations vs everyone else include rural areas.

I assumed that Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, and Zhejiang were purely urban, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

I'm very curious about this as well, because BSJZ is almost an entire proficiency level above (almost) everyone else. That's an insane gap.

>I once visited a radio station and they took their shoes off there too for some reason (no, I don't believe it was ESD related).

Isn't it reasonable/normal to take shoes off at work and put on indoor does like sandals or similar ("work shoes")? Obviously it depends on the job, but it seems reasonable to me at a radio station. And if the regular employees are wearing indoor shoes, then it might become normal for outdoor shoes to not be typically worn inside.

>I have a huge Steam backlog

Yeah, and by the time you get to many of those games they will feel clunky and outdated. It's not just the graphics that ages, but also the game mechanics, UI and UX, and the general presentation of the game. I would rather play Path of Exile than Diablo 2.

>I concede that that’s always been the case for durable written works thanks to the local library. But the scale of convenient supply now is staggerin.

I think even these written works go through "improvements". It's difficult to point out what is better about the more recently written stories, but somehow they are more appealing (in some aspects). Picking up an old book is harder than a new one if you're very familiar with a genre.