Comment Re:So what? (Score 1) 50
And what does the language matter anyway when you can now type in pseudocode into Copilot and ask it to form perfect equivalent code in any language?
Comment Problem with providing OS software for profit: (Score 2) 50
There is a serious problem when a profit--making company provides Operating System software:
Deliberately giving limits to a present version allows the company to charge a lot for a new version, even if the new version provides few important benefits.
Deliberately giving limits to a present version allows the company to charge a lot for a new version, even if the new version provides few important benefits.
Comment Re:Whereas the rest of us believe... (Score 1) 110
Popular opinion is poor evidence.
Submission + - AI: Many discussions, no underlying explanation. 1
Futurepower(R) writes: AI: There is a huge amount of AI news and comments, but apparently nothing that helps people understand how AI is developed, and functions.
We need a book, or other information, that explains how AI technology functions.
We need a book, or other information, that explains how AI technology functions.
Comment Re:Whereas the rest of us believe... (Score 1) 110
It's a research program so, yes "That doesn't mean LLMs *will* deliver AGI". But what are your grounds for being certain taht it won't?
Comment Re:Not surprising (Score 2) 110
Even if it were sentient, it would be acting as the agent of the company that was running it, so they would still be to blame.
Comment Re:Hey guys, I have a great idea! (Score 2) 110
If you don't like "reward", say "positive feedback". It means the same thing, except for being more formally defined.
Comment Re:Hey guys, I have a great idea! (Score 2) 110
LLMs cannot have inherent values, because they don't know that anything besides text exists. Specialized pixel editors have similar problems.
Robots will at least understand the the external reality exists, so perhaps they could have inherent values.
Comment No; audit. Correlation is *NOT* causation. (Score 1) 166
Person, the reason the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... -- has the NULL HYPOTHESIS as "no correlation", is because OF THAT. Your senses LIE!!!!
Fucking take your left and right hand, and 3 buckets if water of different temperatures. Let's say ONE is HOT, ONE is COLD, and the final is LUKEWARM/GOLDILOCKS.
Put your left hand and right hand into C and H, respectively. Wait. Minute.
Put both in the lukewarm.
Do your hands agree on temperature?
No. Fucking pay attention to your mental biases. That's why science is a DISCIPLINE OF MIND.
FFS.
Comment Stop voting in idiots. (Score 1) 166
"This ALPR mass surveillance â" the indiscriminate, continuous collection and retention of location data on every driver, regardless of suspicion â" should not exist. But because it does..."
Because of all those who predate upon those with lack of critical thinking skills.
"Wake up to reality" is the double-think that they say is dumb when they pejoratively call people "woke."
"Woke" is just a word for "slave that doesn't know its place."
Comment heh (Score 5, Insightful) 125
""Run as fast as you can.""
Translation: Me like money
Submission + - Why can't M$ get any UI/UX changes right? (pcmag.com) 1
golem100 writes: A couple weeks ago PCMag, and others, wrote articles along the lines of: "Microsoft Finally Backs Down: The Windows 11 Taskbar Update You've Been Waiting For". This is currently implemented with CU KB5120998 and since M$ has elected to defer "activation" of this feature--some two weeks later for most users it still needs to be enabled by the ViVe tool: vivetool /enable /id:59213768,61090762
Um, No...
The fundamental set of [lost] attributes that this "We brought Movable TaskBar back" lacks:
You can not control the position of the TaskBar on each desktop monitor--example: I have four displays on my desktop, three Landscape & one of which is in a Portrait orientation for reading documents.
With Windows7/8/10 you could position the TaskBar so that it was "Out of the way" and each display--on the right side of the right-most Landscape, on the left for the left-most Landscape display, & on the top/bottom for the Portrait. [same as my desktop on my Linux workstation]
Now you still get the same Taskbar alignment on all desktops.
You can not "resize" the taskbar. (well, you can--it has three sizes: too big, too small, and really way too small) For the previous three generations of the OS you could "Drag-Select" and resize the TaskBar to be the correct size for your needs on your desktop. [...just as I can on my KDE Desktop!]
With this implementation, 1/3 of the Taskbar real estate is consumed with "TaskBar-Tray Notification Icons."
Nobody asked for a partial, broken, re-implementation. The ask was: "Put it Back as it was!"
Dealing with M$ is pretty much like getting your 15 year old to do their chores on garbage night.
Um, No...
The fundamental set of [lost] attributes that this "We brought Movable TaskBar back" lacks:
You can not control the position of the TaskBar on each desktop monitor--example: I have four displays on my desktop, three Landscape & one of which is in a Portrait orientation for reading documents.
With Windows7/8/10 you could position the TaskBar so that it was "Out of the way" and each display--on the right side of the right-most Landscape, on the left for the left-most Landscape display, & on the top/bottom for the Portrait. [same as my desktop on my Linux workstation]
Now you still get the same Taskbar alignment on all desktops.
You can not "resize" the taskbar. (well, you can--it has three sizes: too big, too small, and really way too small) For the previous three generations of the OS you could "Drag-Select" and resize the TaskBar to be the correct size for your needs on your desktop. [...just as I can on my KDE Desktop!]
With this implementation, 1/3 of the Taskbar real estate is consumed with "TaskBar-Tray Notification Icons."
Nobody asked for a partial, broken, re-implementation. The ask was: "Put it Back as it was!"
Dealing with M$ is pretty much like getting your 15 year old to do their chores on garbage night.
Comment Re:Less folks? (Score 1) 158
If things were to otherwise stay the same, then it would. They won't. Some descendant of "vibe coding" will become the dominant mode within 20 years. Probably a *lot* sooner. Next year wouldn't really surprise me.
Comment Re: Nothing of value was added (Score 2) 158
Also, Rust is more complex to use than C, so a small program is much better in C. And a large program is probably better in either C++ or Python(with a lot of library calls).
I don't like Rust, so I'm probably not being fair to it, but I struggle to identify a good use case. (Personally, I'd rather use Forth than Rust.)
Comment Re: Nothing of value was added (Score 1) 158
Note however "will be", not "is". It's not there yet.
Then you have the problem of getting the right standards.
Then you have the problem of getting the right specs.
Then you have the problem of getting the right problem.
There's probably an end to this somewhere, but I doubt that it will be in perfection.
