And I wouldnâ(TM)t bank on a paid email account not being used for AI scraping.
In Google's case, they're under quite a lot of FTC scrutiny, operating under two consent decrees, and they have an employee population that isn't known for keeping their mouths shut. It's possible that Trump's FTC might not act if he were paid off, but a leak would definitely generate a lot of press.
Keep moderating down, fuckups! Does not change that you are fuckups.
Indeed. Dark times.
They are called "religion", "propaganda", "fairy tales", etc.. and they are always used to control people. The only thing that is different now is that we can automatize it. The ones that were not impressed before will continue to be not impressed.
But with about 85% of the human race being religious, there is a rich target field for manipulation. Incidentally, this corresponds nicely with about 15% of the human race being able to fact-check.
The person you answered to clearly things the LLM constructed something and had agency and insight, when in reality it just found everything in its training data and just did a bit of aggregation via correlation (not implication, LLMs cannot do implications) and then presented what it found in a seemingly polished fashion.
If you have no clue how an LLM works and are not very smart (i.e. Dunning-Kruger left-side), you can come to this invalid conclusion.
>you should know that LLMs are just statistical engines that string a bunch of words together which are statistically likely to follow from the prompt, given the body of text the LLM has been trained on
This is not a serious critique, and it's definitely not statistical in nature.
Excuse me? Are you seriously claiming an LLM is not a statistical engine? If so, you need to have your head examined, because that is the literal, mathematical truth.
Hahaha, no. It is just "clear" to you, because you have no clue how research, or risk management or securing software works.
I, on the other hand, am quite capable of identifying critical parts of a performance landscape and then look into those as a priority.
Or in other words, insightless comment is without insight...
Hell yes! It is the American Way!
Actually, he is relevant in this case.
Indeed. Small? WTF? Cannot have that! We need to take IMMEDIATE steps to make our Ozone-hole the largest and most magnificent!
No argument about that. Applies not only to governments, but to anybody that want power in order to control people (that is why most, but not all people go into politics). Hence religion, cults, company structures, even some people in groups of social media have this. It boils down to dominance in some form and it not a positive personality trait.
Deflation and slowing of economy wouldn't be allowed though, Fed would pump money. Your inner Jew needs to be channeled into bargain hunting and saving with investment to have peace.
The lecturer is there to read the room and be responsive to what's necessary to get the points across, otherwise may as well just read it in a book
Yes, very much so. Sometimes it is hard, but the better the rapport you build with the students, the better it works. Talking to them in breaks helps. Showing the occasional weakness helps. If some student know something relevant better than you, let them talk for a few minutes. Of course, some students want the degree, but not do the work (which is really stupid, but it happens) and that is why I have stopped teaching mandatory subjects. If you do not really want to be in my lecture, I do not want you to be there either.
"Never take any speculation as being confirmed until a statement of denial about it is issued."
In this case a false denial would put them in violation of two FTC consent decrees, and would almost certainly leak (Google employees are not known for keeping their mouths shut), so it would be a particularly stupid thing to do.
What kind of a nonsense posting is that? Stop projecting and read what I actually wrote.
Neckties strangle clear thinking. -- Lin Yutang
