ethernot

This is irrelevant really. If they produced a game that was IDF killing Palestinians, well we might have the same view.

Both are fucking tasteless and morally questionable.

Just to note my wife is Japanese so she's aware of that. She does German / French as well and it's fine for that. But still needs a lot of work cleaning it up.

Honestly, and this is not personal, I doubt your ability to determine a bad summarisation or translation outcome. My wife is a professional translator and spends a good deal of time picking up the steaming wrecks that LLMs have left after someone went for the "cheap" option first. And we're talking best of breed stuff like DeepL here.

As for the other points, I rather like to spend some time thinking on them personally. If you're not connected to the decision yourself, what are you?

I'm not sure that it's possible to produce anything reasonable in that space. It would need to know how far it is away from correct to provide a usable confidence value otherwise it'd just be hallucinating a number in the same way as the result.

An analogy. Take a former commuter friend of mine, Mr Skol (named after his favourite breakfast drink). Seen on a minibus I had to get to work years ago, we shared many interesting conversations. Now he was a confident expert on everything. If asked to rate his confidence in a subject it would be a good 95% at least. However he spoke absolute garbage because his brain was rotten away from drinking Skol for breakfast, and the odd crack chaser. I suspect his model was still better than GPT-4o. But an average person could determine the veracity of his arguments.

Thus confidence should be externally rated as an entity with knowledge cannot necessarily rate itself for it has bias. Which then brings in the question of how do you do that. Well you'd have to do the research you were going to do anyway and compare. So now you've used the AI and done the research which you would have had to do if the AI didn't exist. So the AI at this point becomes a cost over benefit if you need something with any level of confidence and accuracy.

Thus the value is zero unless you need crap information, which is at least here, never, unless I'm generating a picture of a goat driving a train or something. And I'm not sure that has any commercial value. But it's fun at least.

So what you're saying is that blockchain, crypto, NFTs had no application up front. Correct. I agree there.

What I am saying is that the applications of AI cannot be fulfilled to the level of the promises made. The promises were made to solicit hype to generate cash, not because the idea was viable or achievable on proof. When we reach maturity, we'll see what is left and I'll wait for that. That's fine. In the mean time I'll have to put up with cats appearing every time I search for dogs in Apple Photos and arguing with ChatGPT about its understanding of the relative magnitude of 9.9 and 9.11, while everyone tells me repeatedly with sweat on their brow that WhateverMODEL+1 will make that problem go away, which it didn't on WhateverMODEL-3,-2,-1,0. Only another $2 billion of losses and we'll nail it then!!!

The end game for all technology changes is not what we think it will be. Been in this game a long time and that is the only certainty.

I don't think we're resistant, just hesitant pragmatists. When something new and shiny turns up, we don't necessarily accept the marketing saying it's going to improve our lives. Best to wait for someone else to get through the early adoption pain and work out all the kinks so we don't have to waste our time on it if it turns out to be a lemon.

With this strategy I entirely missed blockchain, crypto and NFTs and am in the process of missing AI.

I don’t stop doing my job because I’m going on holiday for 4 years in a couple of months.

More seriously it’s probably a good idea to kick things off that should be done so that you can call corruption later when they magically get even worse.

I haven't seen an increase in multiple choice tests in my area (mathematics). We still require written answers and proofs. Some testing is computer-based but it requires entry of formulated results properly.

Really I spend my days shovelling PDFs around.

I am not sure this is the case. I work with a mix of younger and mature students and there is a distinct inability for the younger students to compose complex abstract processes.

When people do well as a cohort they are usually normalised against their peers. It requires a little more academic comparison across age groups.

The economy that isn't backed with criminal activity and loss for customers.

Voltcraft. Can't remember the model number.

The only reason this is an issue for repair shops is they can't sell you recycled stolen parts at bottom of market prices for a sky high mark up. On top of that the "non genuine parts", some of which really are utterly dire, show up in the OS as being not genuine parts. Buying genuine parts, which are available from Apple, eats into the margins. There is very little honour in the repair market, despite the makeup applied to it by a couple of prominent youtubers and organisations.

The amount of horror stories I've seen over the years from independent repairers is just terrible. Just last year a friend had a screen hot snotted back on their Galaxy.

There are so many cases of this sort of stuff it's unreal. But it gets even stupider.

I found one a few years back when I repaired a linear power supply. This required me to reverse engineer it first because there was no service manual. I buzzed the whole thing out and found out that one of the electrolytic capacitors had both legs connected to ground. They must have shipped thousands of power supplies with that error in it and no one even noticed.