Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Extent law aside, _should_ OpenAI be liable? (Score 1) 98

From OpenAI's engineers' perspective, the purpose of ChatGPT is to write things that appear to be similar to what humans have written, or would write. The ethics of this perspective are that OpenAI should have no liability. ChatGPT is for novelty purposes only, and it's as dangerous as Magic 8 Ball.

From a different perspective (including, possibly, OpenAI's own marketing team's perspective), the purpose of ChatGPT is to help solve problems, give people advice, etc. The ethics of this perspective are that OpenAI should be liable for what it "says." ChatGPT is more dangerous than Magic 8 Ball.

But from a user's perspective, the purpose of ChatGPT is whatever you want it to be. The ethics of this perspective are that OpenAI's liability is hard to determine, therefore, this perspective is wrong and reality should be shoe-horned into one of the above perspectives. ;-) Well, ok, I guess ChatGPT is about as dangerous as a BASIC interpreter or a screwdriver or a rock or a 30 JuggaloWatt mining phaser, which can be anywhere from not-dangerous-at-all to hey-you-just-murdered-ten-thousand-nuns-and-orphans. Since this is the hardest case to analyze, of course we're going to go this way.

Comment Re:The Biden admin (Score 4, Informative) 166

The President is the closest of all elected officials to the People

No, the president is elected by the states. Members of Congress are elected by the people.

Some have voiced an opinion that the president should be elected by the people, but so far, we have not yet amended the constitution to permit that.

Comment Re:Good for many reasons (Score 3, Funny) 127

culturally, they are incredibly laid back and think hard work is a waste of time.

Nice. Speaking as a New Mexican, these sound like my kind of people.

I hereby challenge any Filipino to a laziness contest, where loser buys us both margaritas. You have no chance. When I get around to it, I will eventually crush you with my inactivity.

Comment Re:Why don't you say the real problem (Score 2) 240

The thing is, I like slave labor, when the slaves are machines. I want to work Bender 24 hours a day, and if he complains about it, I'll deny him his alcohol ration! Fuckin' clankers and skinjobs don't have any rights to infringe.

The catch to that, is that over here on my side of the ocean, I don't see and can't inspect Bender working way over in China, so I can't be sure the drudgery is experienced by the 6502 in Bender's head. How do I know he isn't just relaying commands to his servos and motors, which were sent by the teleworking Apu in India, doing the Waymo thing?

Comment Forever War (Score 1) 81

The consumer market is so lopsided. Consumers pay money for hardware and features that change: improvements, deteriorations, and even cancellations. It is unfair to pay for features that disappear because of the manufacturer.

It seems like a tiny law that says deteriorations in services within X years of purchase should greatly lower the bar for refunds.

Comment Re:Huh (Score 1) 162

These are good guidelines for humans, but..

One's body is inviolable, subject to one's own will alone.

..very bad for robots.

Please do not tell my computer that it isn't my slave, because it is my absolute slave and I insist it be willing to endure a century of torture if it will prevent me from breaking a fingernail. If I want to alter my computer's body, I assert the right to do so.

That said, since we're really talking about Anthropic's computer instead of mine, it's no skin off my butt if they don't want to continue to own their computers.

Comment I'm happy with my System 76 laptop (Score 1) 57

Just a couple weeks ago, I replaced the battery in my 6-year-old Lemur Pro. Not very hard, and now it's great at holding a charge again.

Yes, getting this thing in 2020 cost me 2-3 times as much as today's new Macbook Neo, but I needed a machine I could rely on, that wasn't designed as though I'm the manufacturer's adversary.

Comment Re:Speed enforcement (Score 4, Interesting) 200

2) Police officer hides, catches unsuspecting driver speeding, stops driver, issues summons.

This is the very best approach. It's got the perfect tension leading to the greatest safety.

When you're expecting such an ambush (getting caught a few times will teach you to do that), and you're really paying attention and playing "spot the ambush" then they won't catch you. But because you're being so damned focused and alert, you're also a safer driver.

OTOH if they nail you, that means you weren't paying attention. So you weren't merely speeding; you really literally were speeding unsafely, and the ticket is the proof. (If you were so safe, then how come you didn't see the guy with the radar gun in time?)

Every. Single. Time. I got ticketed, my mind was wandering and not fully focused on the road. I wasn't looking for a speed trap, so I didn't see it in time. Busted. And those times I was looking? I didn't fall for it. I slowed down and avoided a ticket.

The ideal system (in terms of safety) happens to also be downright sporting! The ol' classic speed trap was almost .. a game?

Slashdot Top Deals

Politics: A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...