Every thought piece around the subject of generative AI starts and ends with how the tech is "exciting and scary". The sentiment is cliche to the point that going forward I'll just assume the articles were generated by a model.
1,312 karma · joined October 15, 2020
I've seen so much hype around these tools. Not only are they theoretically unsound, they're downright dangerous and equip folks with spurious confidence. Going forward, the default assumption should be that the content you're looking at is fake unless you have sufficiently high trust in the source.
International transfers are certainly not instant - Wise originally innovated a cheaper and faster solution to this problem, but that crown is fast vanishing as rivals heat up their offerings (Atlantic Money, Revolut, amongst others).
BTC is a valid alternative to these options. My real gripe is the on/off-ramp between FIAT and crypto. That's where the fees are in my experience.
[1] https://www.gbm.hsbc.com/-/media/gbm/insights/images/scheme-...
In the case of recommendation systems, the unconscious consumer is wholly unaware of the witchcraft occurring on the backend.
OpenAI's ChatGPT, Midjourney, HuggingFace, and their kin, are commoditising a technology that was historically resigned to hidden artefacts, whose input was limited to system calls, not user calls.
Hindsight is ofc 20/20, those contracts have long since been set in stone, but I can't help but think Stripe (and maybe other future companies) could have saved themselves a $6bn headache by not having the expiry in the first place.
> Broety is a style of writing, often popular on LinkedIn, that uses line breaks after every sentence to create long posts that tend to drive high views and engagement. These “broems” usually follow a standard formula: A clickbait-style “hook.” Followed by a somewhat unrealistic conversation.
> "Ey, wagwan fam, bare man gwarn dis flick, whatchu sayin'?"
Translated, this means:
> "Hey, how are you? Some folks are headed to the cinema. Would you like to join?"
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicultural_London_English
In this case: https://archive.ph/SUYp1
> This graph showing the number and percentage of research papers published in English / Non-English [1]
> Newton’s Principia Mathematica was written in Latin; Einstein’s first influential papers were written in German; Marie Curie’s work was published in French. Yet today, most scientific research around the world is published in a single language, English. [2]
> Since the middle of the last century, things have shifted in the global scientific community. English is now so prevalent that in some non-English speaking countries, like Germany, France, and Spain, English-language academic papers outnumber publications in the country’s own language several times over. In the Netherlands, one of the more extreme examples, this ratio is an astonishing 40 to 1. [2]
[1] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cms/asset/4c61e2a0-f5fe-4851... [2] https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/08/english-...
[1] https://hubermanlab.com/what-alcohol-does-to-your-body-brain...
> The returns to factual knowledge are falling, continuing a trend that started with databases, search engines and Wikipedia. It is no longer so profitable to be a lawyer who knows a large amount of accumulated case law. Instead, the skills of synthesis and persuasion are more critical for success.[1]
As well as being simple “exceptional”, returns to being extroverted in the workplace will increase. Those who can show they’re distinguishable from bots will prosper.
Tl;dr: focus on interpersonal skills and persuasion.
[1] https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2022/12/wh...
In any case, this is a nice strategy to hedge.
> I should congratulate the thieves on accessing his Barclays account though. I was a customer of Barclays for many years but simply got fed up of constant technical errors preventing me from accessing my own funds.
This is certainly one way to keep your money safe! Bravo, Barclays
ChatGPT has it's shortcomings, but I've found myself returning to it over and over again. Then consider what this technology will look like in a few years time and the conclusion is that, imo, the hype is justified.
True in the context of sitting at a desk and writing. But during a quickfire conversation, I find it incredibly satisfying talking to someone who crafts vivid imagery and uses wicked turns of phrase. I wonder how much LLMs like ChatGPT et al will help or hinder our ability to wordsmith in realtime. Will there be a measurable "ChatGPT" effect on literacy skills in 20 years time, I wonder.
The opening sentence is a perfect example of how to write English... if you want it to lack clarity. Double negatives like this leave the reader having to spend time working out the positive meaning of the sentence.
> Scammers get hold of someone's voice which is synthesised in ~real-time whilst they're on the phone with that person's mother, asking them to transfer them some emergency funds to a new bank account.
We won't be able to trust digital sound, digital image, digital text, and soon digital video. We need proof of authenticity / proof of authorship / proof of humanity!
While I agree with you that the net effect of such technology will be negative, there's no way regulation can keep up.
Tangentially — apologies if this is the wrong thread for this —, I know this is distinct to AI generated music (the melody here is a one-to-one mapping between the input song and output piano), but I’m curious when folks here think when the first totally generated artist will go mainstream with chart hits and millions of “followers”. With both an AI generated avatar and AI generated music. And no, not like Gorillaz who simply had fake cartoon personas.
If you believe the argument floating around that content we consume in the future will be hyper individualised to the point music/tv will be generated just for us, then maybe never. IMO that runs counter to shared idolatry that people seem to crave, seems to me just a matter of time.