redleggedfrog

I wish this wasn't brushed off, but when I suggest it, frequently, as a scientifically proven method of improving happiness, well, it gets brushed off. I guess it's really difficult to relate just how much it can improve your life. Some of the highlights of my entire life have been coaching 3rd/4th grade girls basketball at a YMCA. Yeah, it's a lot of work at the time, but the memories are priceless, and the benefit to the kids is definite - they tell me, years (and sometimes years and years - with a baby in their arms) later.

"The asteroid that caused the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event was also just a blip on Earth’s history, it did however succeed in making life on earth miserable for a few thousand years, wiping out 75% of the all the species in the process."

Sure, but that leaves a heaping helping of the remaining 25% to carry on to eventually repopulate the planet with more glorious life. It's happened before, it'll happen again, and whether we're the reason or the victim doesn't really matter. Life finds a way, with or without humans.

Might seem a bit misanthropic, but us humans probably are just going to be a blip on Earth's history, being the proverbial frog in the slowly boiling pot. But I suspect that cockroaches will carry on just fine. So at least there is hope for the future.

Surprised to encounter someone more vehemently against ads than me. But I appreciate the sentiment, and bookmarked the site so I can try some of those things myself.

I pay for what I want to look at, not with my time and attention, but money, the way God intended it.

Remember kids, when you cheat, you cheat yourself.

Which is why I literally ignore 99.99% of what comes down the shit pipes.

If you say. But I doubt it. Now, could this happen to others - yes, completely plausible.

At that point it's no different than, say, graffiti. Can only be of so much artistic value, and certainly not worth more than a glance.

"Vet all media that comes into your life?"

I already do.

Meh. Not interesting from a human standpoint. What possible insights into the human condition can such a Frankenstein's monster of AI give me? What has the AI been through that informs its "art." I can't relate to the AI, I cannot empathize with it, I don't identify with it.

Same goes for what an AI might write that isn't technical information I might make use of.

Same goes for images.

Simply I don't care what "art" might come from AI because there is no human involved. I'm a human - I want human things, not things that undermine my humanity.

It's trained on other peoples (less than great) code? Cause the results I'm getting wouldn't pass my company's code reviews.

I read/listen to NPR daily. Twitter is blocked at my router. My very tech savvy family hasn't even mentioned the block once. Making good choices Mom...

Crime is a for profit business for the perpetrators, politicians, and law enforcement, and the only victims are, well, the victims. There isn't much profit in peace.

This is the future - maybe not everywhere, and probably not soon, but it is an eventuality. Also, AI will be treated like encryption - it will become a munition, with the same type of restrictions as munitions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...). Governments will keep the best AI for themselves, leaving the goof-nuts ChatGPT type stuff for private citizens.

Then the question becomes did those gun downed humans deserve what they got? And did that massacre result in a greater good? Those are the not-so-pleasant questions the humans will have to ask themselves (probably using AI to help, ironically).

Ebert's take focuses on the human aspect of Solaris, but the other aspect of both the movie and the book that is just as appealing to me is our inability to understand the alien ocean itself. All the attempts to anthropomorphize its behavior fail, and in the end Solaris research is abandoned because the ocean is essentially inscrutable to humans. This theme is also covered in another Lem book, "Fiasco."

I love the idea of an alien, presented before us, completely available to us to interact with, and we cannot bridge the gap because we and it are so different.

It just leaves you with "What is it doing?!" which is such a wonderful contrast to the deep emotional impact that its behavior (creating the doppelgangers) has on humans. Does it know? Is it coincidence? Is it malicious? So many good mysteries.

Okay, that makes more sense to me. But those seem like "toy" things to throw ChatGTP at (not dismissing their usefulness or their importance to you, just that they are fairly simple things [and maybe I'm wrong here, I have not written zsh - I googled it just now]).

I think my needs are too specific, and often too nebulous.

Also, just a bit chapped about falling for the hype.

LOL! You got that right! They don't.

"I think people writing all this should stop and try GPT4." Have you? I mean, for something that's actually useful beyond just simple stuff, like at your job where it's going to matter? Because for what I'm doing which is custom ERP/Website data flows to/from legacy systems it's mostly a time sink and offers little value.

Well that's some pure evil from Post's marketing dept.

"Does anyone feel that way? Maybe I am wrong and the technology hasn't really clicked for me yet."

No, I'm trying mightily to do what Yegge is talking about in the context of the programming work I do everyday. First v3 then v4. I've given up until maybe v7 or something.

The problem is it doesn't have experience with my code-base. Sure, tell it to open a file and return a stream, it'll do that (after I fix the using statements), but for what I'm doing every day it doesn't even begin to know what to do.

And because I'm careful about KISS and SOLID I don't really need a lot of simple code generation. I don't see 5x productivity. I actually don't see much advantage over the built in tools in VS.

Maybe I'm doing it wrong, or maybe this make sense for people who write a lot of boilerplate, but that's not a lot of what I do.

"It's just a tiny tiny change. We just dropped the "Don't ". The shorter phrase better reflects our new streamlined business practices to better suck shareholder d*ck."

It works the other way, too. You're happier when you don't consume the news. That is also scientifically proven, although I have no linkage to support that claim.

"Like a snow day for your whole life." Thank you, that gave me a hearty laugh.

I love the hand-wringing. I can hear the South Park, "They're coming for our jerbs!"

The problem is going to be the what people do with the AI. Imagine our good friends over at Meta setting the AI on its products with the express purpose of driving engagement. Optimize for the maximum possible amount of usage. They already do this but now they'll have AI to make it even better. And then we've got more people wasting their lives on their phones.

Or casinos - have the AI optimize for the maximum possible reaping of gambler money.

Or marketers having AI improve their ads so we just can't keep from clicking on them.

Or script kiddies using AI to compromise systems.

The problem is the people, people.

Should be fine as long as the put the nets on the outside of the buildings to catch the jumpers. /s

I think because it's easier. The skeuomorphic designs take thinking, actual design work. The flat UI elements essentially design themselves. Of course designers are going to gravitate towards having to do less and having to think about it carefully. That's work. People hate work, and it opens you up to criticism. If you do the same as everybody else you're relatively insulated from criticism.

Flat UI is mostly crap, but it's going to take a lot of people complaining a lot more vehemently to get anything to change.

I'm right there with you. The destruction of the public records themselves should be a jailable offense.

Rather than subconscious fear I have conscious hope. I really hope that such models can be used for improving human life, something, much more really, than what appears to be the trivial uses of Chat-GPT. How about we feed it information on carbon sinks and helps slow down climate change? How do we get people to limit population voluntarily? How do we improve education? Better forest management techniques? I know I'm asking a lot here but this is all its infancy so maybe I'm not being overly optimistic.

Interesting that little correlation was found. My experience has been that "good" programmers follow the most prevalent conventions of the language so their code is easily parsed by other humans used to seeing it that way. Like I use a braces on their own lines in C# but an opening brace at the end of the line in Ecmascript. When in Rome...

Ouch with those down votes. Prolly don't say "all" cause absolutes are almost always wrong. But the sentiment is correct. They're not in those positions because they're technically smart, but because they're good at social climbing and empire building. And in my experience exceptionally bereft of integrity. Layoffs are a tool in their C level signaling system. Maybe they're good for the company and maybe they're not, but they're doing what the other C levels are going so they're mostly safe from repercussions and scrutiny.