Comment Re:The Great Enshittification... history will call (Score 1) 28
Makes me glad I gave up on TV. (OTOH, it makes me worry about the next time I need to replace a monitor.)
Makes me glad I gave up on TV. (OTOH, it makes me worry about the next time I need to replace a monitor.)
It's a combination of training data and rewards. Chatbots are trained to never admit that they don't know, and to always be willing to be convinced that the person talking to them is correct. This makes them more popular, and enchances engagement, but at the cost of accuracy.
I think that if they're actually generating feature length films, they'll probably be decent...well, not much worse than what they've been doing. Films are expensive not just to shoot, but also to make, so I expect there'll be lots of steps where "editorial judgement" is applied.
OTOH, I'm not a movie goer. I don't know the current quality. And Ed Wood is a level it's pretty hard to go below.
No. The scam callers speak English. Perhaps not well, but it's English that they are speaking.
To repeat a point I made earlier, information is not knowledge. Knowledge may be either true or false (i.e. it's a signed quantity). Information is most densely contained in (at least apparently) random noise.
IIUC, the chinese ideograph system is common between all those languages, and therefore would count as one common language...until the computers started audio processing. (FWIW, it's my understanding that many of the Chinese ideographs even have approximately the same meaning in one of the Japanese writing systems.)
A point, but (and this is admittedly a quibble) I wouldn't call languages a "vast body of human knowledge". The data encoded within that language might qualify, but not the language itself. Unfortunately, without understanding the language there's no way of reasonably estimating the size of the contained "human knowledge" that isn't contained in sources already covered.
FWIW, I think treating "the internet" as a body of human knowledge is foolish. Parts of it are, but much of it is negative-knowledge (i.e. learning it makes you stupider). The internet *is* a body of human information...but some information is garbage.
Now I admit that, say, Tamil may contain encoded large amounts of history and large amounts of myth. Whether they are clearly enough separated to be called knowledge isn't something I can tell. (Actually, Tamil should contain much of the history of the development of math...but it's not clear to me that this would be readily distinguishable from the related myths even by a careful historian, much less by a current LLM.)
Loans always have such vile terms that I do my best to avoid them. I've been pretty successful, but sometimes there is no real choice. But whenever I bought a car it was cash down, no interest.
As far as I am concerned, the importance of this law is that the person writing the contract has to make the terms clear to the person accepting it. "fine print" has always been a despicable legal tradition.
This isn't something they can't read. This is something that requires a trivial conversion. But you got the message correctly.
It's been reported that the conversion is trivial. So this is purely symbolic + nuisance.
The FOSS crowd is known for avoiding likely law suits. IIUC, the WPS format would be likely found to be a copyright violation if one didn't have a powerful government on ones side. (Or at least a firm of powerful lawyers and deep pockets.)
Three of my computers. I update them usually with CDRom disks that I build from one of my computers which IS connected to the internet...but the data only flows in one direction.
Only if it's on a network...or from direct physical access.
No. Even the early chess engines used things like alpha-beta pruning and position evaluation functions. Chess was too complex to just calculate all possible moves. IBM *did* use a lot of brute force on top of that, but it requires the "intelligent" underpinnings.
In a way, yes. The universe runs on narrativium. That's sort of the claim whenever someone makes claims about an area that they don't understand. And nobody understands modern AIs, not even those who build them.
OTOH, there are tightly reasoned narratives and wish-fulfillment narratives. They aren't the same. This *sounds* like a wish-fulfillment narrative, but he may be actually up to something more dubious. E.g. grounds for firing anyone he wants to.
In the long run, every program becomes rococco, and then rubble. -- Alan Perlis