javascriptfan69

from the eminem song stan (also possibly from super-fan)

What is the use case for the average non-technical person?

LLMs are cool and all but I feel like the average person is not really getting enough value out of them to keep the "wow this thing will probably make me jobless in 5 years" thoughts out.

sure but to other users that's a feature and part of why they're here

it's like going to a cafe and complaining that everyone is drinking coffee

the people moderating the platform that you signed up to post on?

what do you mean?

Isn't this the promise of AI?

>AI removes all these hurdles and directly presents you with the end problem - communication.

Which is why 99.9% of AI art is worthless. There's literally nothing personal or interesting about getting grok to fart out some picture you thought about while sitting on the toilet in the morning.

AI art will never be good without actual artists embracing the medium.

yeah but mine don't reveal my unhealthy obsession with trans people

do you ever get tired of making up scenarios to be scared about lgbt people?

Is this supposed to be funny

We need a social media Nuremberg

Your body is 50% water and you can still die from drinking too much.

The one my doctor was using got my obs numbers completely wrong.

We had to correct them at the end of the consultation.

Much like when people discuss whether these companies are profitable: training costs don't count.

Beautifully written.

>Are you moving the goalpost?

I mean you did originally claim that this was something that was "for the masses" and then posted a solution that only someone technical could actually use.

Not that I doubt it couldn't one shot something this simple with a .exe wrapper.

That's pretty neat! Thanks for elaborating.

What was the feature and what was the note?

So what are they supposed to do?

Race to burn as much cash as possible in hopes that the other goes bankrupt first?

These models aren't profitable at the fixed subscription tiers.

I'm not anti-AI but I'm starting to feel like I live on a different planet to the pro-AI people.

Everything in this article seems fucking insane to me.

I genuinely think we will look back at the algorithmic content feed as being on par with leaded gasoline or cigarettes in terms of societal harm.

Maybe worse since it is engineered to be as addictive as possible down to an individual level.

Then again maybe I'm being too optimistic that it will be fixed before it destroys us.

You don't have to bet money on it.

You can just stop taking antibiotics and vaccines.

Those are way more interesting odds.

>Cooling the planet is neither a technical nor financial problem

Yes it is. All solutions have trade offs.

Beautiful

If you don't understand the difference between a credible, immediate threat to someone's life and someone posting a meme online you're too uninformed to be having this conversation and I won't be responding further.

College students posting memes online is not the same as a crowd of people (some armed) forcing their way into a government building chanting "Hang Mike Pence" knowing that Mike Pence was inside.

Be serious.

What is your argument? That not every person there was trying to kill Mike Pence?

There sure were a lot of people in that crowd chanting "Hang Mike Pence" but I guess if your point is just that not all of them were doing it then I suppose you're right.

"According to an F.B.I. affidavit the panel highlighted ... a government informant said that members of the far-right militant group the Proud Boys told him they would have killed Pence 'if given the chance.' The rioters on January 6th almost had that chance, coming within forty feet of the Vice-President as he fled to safety."

https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-bidens-washington...

Why would you include costs incurred by children?

That would be constant between natural born citizens and immigrants.

This critique makes no sense.

Are you talking about trade deficit?

This is about deficit in government spending.

Immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits.

Where did you get that assertion?

The article literally says that they earn more because they work more hours on average.