Searching what is already there. Obviously. That will require putting their new stuff in there and then the LLM assholes steal that.

Because they know the next county over will hire them in a heartbeat to avoid paying the money to train another cop. We made it stupidly expensive to train police because we made it the corrupt mess like we do with everything...

So they will just pick a case that's open and tie it to that and move on.

If you want to make them accountable you have to change how you vote. The lack of police accountability is a political problem. You can't solve it with a few minor policy tweeks

Dole whip is not frozen non-dairy dessert. The term Frozen non-dairy dessert means a very specific and very unpleasant thing when you are out shopping. It's how you spot fake ice cream. Dole whip is pureed Frozen pineapple. Well yeah that's technically Frozen non-dairy dessert the term is not used in marketing Dole whip. It doesn't have to be because you don't make Dole whip with palm oil...

If you see those magic words on a bucket of something pretending to be ice cream turn and walk away. I miss Klondike bars too....

It's not that they really enjoy it it's that they have some health or ethical reason that makes them settle for what they don't actually want.

And that market isn't really all that big. If you look up the current state of the impossible burger and beyond meat both companies are struggling...

As for AI yeah there's a market for people who just want slop in endless supply. But it's usually people with nothing going on who just need limitless content to fill a day. Like a lot of old farts I've got a bad back and I'll admit that I consume a lot of garbage while doing a ton of physical therapy. Crap I never would have bothered with if I wasn't spending a couple hours a day doing PT and I needed something to listen to to get my mind off the misery of it.

But that's not really a big enough market for anything but niche producers. Right now they can survive because AI companies are burning through cash giving away free service but that's going to stop pretty soon.

And marketers have already looked into it. Those folks have absolutely no morals whatsoever and they don't care what they sell as long as it sells. And AI slop doesn't sell. The only thing that's useful for is scams and it's only useful for that right at the moment because the lower quality is a good thing Nigerian prince style and again it's being heavily subsidized by venture capital.

This is fully accusatory because you make sweeping statements about things you do not understand. Not a good thing to do.

I think it's more a quality difference. China's film industry is much smaller so anything that needs special effects of any kind doesn't have the kind of budget to make it to the point where a casual viewer is going to be turned off by AI at the level you can currently get it at.

China does have some big budget films but I suspect those aren't going to use AI much or at all.

Here in America even TV shows have ridiculously high budgets. Some of that is the actors but a lot of it is the cost of doing and redoing CGI with human beings modeling everything. And even that was a cost-cutting measure over practical effects because CGI companies are non-union.

For a smaller studio with a lower budget and an audience that's used to your output at that level you can probably get away with a bit more. If they tried that in one of those big period pieces China does every now and then though I bet it would stand out like a sore thumb and people would hate it. Like I don't think they would get away with that in The Forbidden Kingdom.

Actors fundamentally are just middle men between the story teller and the audience. Generative video and audio AI like many IT developments is removing middle men from the relationship.

You ever had that Frozen non-dairy dessert crap?

Every now and then I accidentally buy a tub of it by mistake. I take a few bites and start eating it and it doesn't taste right but I take a few more bites before I really can convince myself something is wrong.

Every time I just assumed that I bought a bad tub of ice cream somehow. So I look at the expiration date and the stuff should be good I didn't buy something that just got stuck in the back for 10 years or something. And inevitably I noticed that what I bought was the ice cream. It was oil made the taste a little bit like ice cream.

It's the one and only time that I will take the effort and time needed to return something to a grocery store.

AI is like that. I might take a bite or two before I realize something is off meaning I might watch a few minutes of a TV program or play a few minutes of a game. But I quickly realize and if I have time you can bet I will be refunding that game on steam. You usually get stuck with any DVDs or Blu-Rays you buy though. As for streaming yeah I just cut it off and move on.

So you can fool me for a little bit and you can sometimes get a purchase out of me but not for very long.

AI slop will get better but it's never going to not feel a little bit off just like how fake ice cream is never going to taste right. It's The uncanny Valley effect where the closer you get the worse it gets.

And even if your movie is LLM generated, you still need ideas and creativity to make it. On the other hand, soap-operas are an early form of pre-LLM slop.

1. Untrue in general. There is always a mix of empirical and theoretical research and Math is no different.
2. You are just trying to confuse the issue with nonsense.

If you steal ideas, the Math community will be even harsher on you than other scientific communities, because having good ideas and insights in Math is harder than in most other areas due to a often very long time you need to even understand the state-of-the-art. And stealing ideas is exactly why you always need to state all your sources. It is to make it exactly clear what your specific contribution is. If you do not publish your sources, you have no claim to the result you state being yours. That is not how Math or other theoretical research works.

Because you always add a list of literature references and the complete argument for elementary facts. Surely.

It is. The additional problem with a badly restrained police is that you always slide towards a police state, where the police has no accountability and can do whatever they like as long as they still serve the rich and powerful. ICE is a nice example of that, even when it now looks like they may not get away with all the murdering, raping, child-abusing, etc. that they did.

Hence the police must be restricted carefully, no doubt about that. Also makes it more expensive. But European standard is that cops have no immunity, just some special powers. They are typically required to get a bachelor’s degree before they are allowed to do anything and that weeds out most of the assholes that are just after power. Sure, there are still bad apples, but they have a high chance of getting caught and punished.

Yes. I have observed that as well. Especially when you ask for something more obscure the LLM may have an idea from its training data and give you an actually correct statement, but it cannot find the sources, because apparently the way to find them is to do a web-search after. And then sometimes hallucinate that what they found are sources for the statements made, but they are not.

A rather crass LLM limit that makes verification of claims hard and sometimes practically impossible. Because LLMs hallucinate, this basically makes LLMs useless for anything were they cannot get you the sources. Incidentally, that would be the most valuable use for "better search" and it is just there where LLMs fail frequently. Hence what LLMs excel at is answering simple questions. But these are better answered with a regular web-search, because that gives you better context and is mich better for learning and remembering stuff.

The result may stand, but the claim that it is your result will not unless the citations are there and complete. Which, incidentally, is what the story is about?

A completely worthless argument because nobody knows how humans (well, some humans) can generate original thoughts.