... for "I want to program for a living.". CS is way more than that, but that was the reason many people chose it. Since AI now can code as good as humans and explain to a human what it's doing, studying CS to program is less of a thing now.
CS and it's"applied math"thing won't go away, but that was less people will study it sounds quite plausible IMHO.
The AI coding assistants can then be used where appropriate and with greater review by the more talented. Reducing the "slop."
So heres the thing. I've had a bunch of my work as the senior dev move from "Work on coding challenges with the younger devs and help them code high quality reliable software" to "code review this AI slop and tell me why it doesnt work" , and its fucking miserable work.
Theres a lot more of it, and its batshit code for the most part. Just illogical choices and no craftmanship (Though I'll give claude one thing;- It comments its code, something I've been yelling at junior coders to do for the better part of my career. Lets the greybeard know what the hell they are trying to achieve so I can look at their code and fix it so it actually achieves it.
Its really weird. If you look at where the school, and neighboring barracks are. The line between the school and the barracks directly lines up to where the carrier is parked in the strait of hormuz. Ok. So that lines up with the possibility that the missile overshot the target. That happens from time to time, even the best weapons systems have targetting whoopsies.
The problem is the school was hit Twice with a "double tap" kill-the-survivors hit. That meant it overshot twice? Less likely.
The bit that weirds me out, is that any reasonable intelligence analysis , on account of being a reasonable human being , would go. "OK we see the target. Problem is its next to a school full of children" (The school is marked on google maps, it wasnt a secret). So the logical solution is you hit it at night when all them kids are at home. No dead children to mess up the narrative or give the missile loaders PTSD.
So yeah, definite incompetence SOMEWHERE. It is plausible indeed that the AI chose the target and it wasn't bright enough to go "Ok, theres kids in danger with this strike, escalate this to a human with some suggested actions to minimize civilian lifes. Even worse is the possibility that it did, and Captain fuck-face said "I dont care, fire anyway".
Good at math: fail.
Ok, so he's one of the tiny earlier models.
On: "A Palantir spokesperson told Bloomberg the company "is not responsible for the underlying data nor identifying intelligence deficiencies" and that there is no evidence its software was at fault."
Is AI now an aspect of Mother Nature? Reminds me of:
https://2001.fandom.com/wiki/F...
""Let me put it this way, Mr. Amer. The [Palantir] 9000 series is the most reliable computer ever made. No 9000 computer has ever made a mistake, or distorted information. We are all, by any practical definition of the word, foolproof and incapable of error." -- [Palantir's] HAL 9000 to BBC reporter Martin Amer"
https://humanisticsystems.com/...
"Dave: How would you account for this discrepancy between you and the twin [Palantir] 9000 [that did not kill lots of school girls]?
HAL: Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error.
Frank: Listen HAL. There has never been any instance at all of a computer error occurring in the [Palantir] 9000 series, has there?
HAL: None whatsoever, Frank. The [Palantir] 9000 series has a perfect operational record.
Frank: Well of course I know all the wonderful achievements of the [Palantir] 9000 series, but, uh, are you certain there has never been any case of even the most insignificant computer error?
HAL: None whatsoever, Frank. Quite honestly, I wouldn't worry myself about that."
What do you call an AI (or human) that never asks questions, never seeks confirmatory evidence, never asks for clarification, never points out conflicting priorities, and/or never refuses illegal orders?
Onec again, the deeper issue is "the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity."
https://pdfernhout.net/recogni...
====
Military robots like drones are ironic because they are created essentially to force humans to work like robots in an industrialized social order. Why not just create industrial robots to do the work instead?
Nuclear weapons are ironic because they are about using space age systems to fight over oil and land. Why not just use advanced materials as found in nuclear missiles to make renewable energy sources (like windmills or solar panels) to replace oil, or why not use rocketry to move into space by building space habitats for more land?
Biological weapons like genetically-engineered plagues are ironic because they are about using advanced life-altering biotechnology to fight over which old-fashioned humans get to occupy the planet. Why not just use advanced biotech to let people pick their skin color, or to create living arkologies and agricultural abundance for everyone everywhere?
These militaristic socio-economic ironies would be hilarious if they were not so deadly serious.
Likewise, even United States three-letter agencies like the NSA and the CIA, as well as their foreign counterparts, are becoming ironic institutions in many ways. Despite probably having more computing power per square foot than any other place in the world, they seem not to have thought much about the implications of all that computer power and organized information to transform the world into a place of abundance for all. Cheap computing makes possible just about cheap everything else, as does the ability to make better designs through shared computing.
There is a fundamental mismatch between 21st century reality and 20th century security thinking. Those "security" agencies are using those tools of abundance, cooperation, and sharing mainly from a mindset of scarcity, competition, and secrecy. Given the power of 21st century technology as an amplifier (including as weapons of mass destruction), a scarcity-based approach to using such technology ultimately is just making us all insecure. Such powerful technologies of abundance, designed, organized, and used from a mindset of scarcity could well ironically doom us all whether through military robots, nukes, plagues, propaganda, or whatever else... Or alternatively, as Bucky Fuller and others have suggested, we could use such technologies to build a world that is abundant and secure for all.
The big problem is that all these new war machines and the surrounding infrastructure are created with the tools of abundance [otherwise they would not be so powerful or capable of so much rapid destruction as well as rapid creation]. The irony is that these tools of abundance are being wielded by people still obsessed with fighting over scarcity. So, the scarcity-based political mindset driving the military uses the technologies of abundance to create artificial scarcity. That is a tremendously deep irony that remains so far unappreciated by the mainstream.
We the people need to redefine security in a sustainable and resilient way. Much current US military doctrine is based around unilateral security ("I'm safe because you are nervous") and extrinsic security ("I'm safe despite long supply lines because I have a bunch of soldiers to defend them"), which both lead to expensive arms races. We need as a society to move to other paradigms like Morton Deutsch's mutual security ("We're all looking out for each other's safety") and Amory Lovin's intrinsic security ("Our redundant decentralized local systems can take a lot of pounding whether from storm, earthquake, or bombs and would still would keep working").
====
Then people might be able to find what they want rather than what amazon wants to sell and without 50 pages of a completely identical product one after the other.
NSA has a better ring to it than A.I. Force.
Being in a psychiatric hospital for an indeterminate period, sitting in a wheelchair wondering when Nurse Ratchet is going to get around to changing your diaper isn't exactly "Getting Off", just saying.
Here is a little TL;DR on how argumentation works:
1. make your claim
2. back your claim with evidence
If you do #1 without #2, you are not going to convince anyone that isn't a mouth-breathing window-licker like yourself.
It's not my responsibility to prove your claim for you. That's your responsibility, and if you were not a mouth-breathing window-licker, you would already know that and wouldn't just post additional baseless weapons-grade bullshit as some kind of reinforcement of your argument.
Let me give you an example of how fucking stupid you are: quotes of Democrats, specifically the Obama Administration saying exactly what you are asking for:
Furthermore, here is a direct quote of the House Minority Leader (Hakeem Jeffries, who will be Speaker of the House soon enough) giving you exactly the quote you want:
“Iran is a bad actor and must be aggressively confronted for its human rights violations, nuclear ambitions, support of terrorism and the threat it poses to our allies like Israel and Jordan in the region,” Jeffries said. “However, absent exigent circumstances, the Trump administration must seek authorization for the preemptive use of military force that constitutes an act of war.”
I know none of this is going to convince you - you probably aren't even going to read it in favor of compulsively complying with more unsubstantiated horseshit because you are a propagandized hayseed incapable of any intellectual objectivity. I'm hoping other people read this so they can laugh at you for being so ridiculously uninformed, or just a pathologically lying asshat hiding behind anonymity because your lies are so easy to see through.
Because deals cannot be extended?
Do you know how negotiations and diplomacy work even at the most superficial level?
It doesn't look like you are ever going to figure out what "on topic" means.
Hint: you are talking about genitals in an article about AI. Please stop being the dumbest motherfucker alive.
More goalpost moving that has nothing to do with the topic.
Thanks for proving you have no argument except bad faith arguments.
So you completely misunderstand how your "whataboutism" to a completely orthogonal topic (i.e. goalpost moving) is a bad faith argument, meant to distract from the question you don't want to answer.
And then you go on with the bad faith argument.
Nice try, but not everyone around here is as stupid as you, and can recognize your weak shit for what it is.
The sheer tonnage of irony of this cuck spewing right-wing dipshittery while accusing others of being "drowned in Media Propaganda" would stun a John Deere in it's tracks.
So will running it out of diesel fuel because the farmer is bankrupt from having his soybean market taken from him, his fuel input costs doubled, and the importation of 300 million tons of mystery meat that would never pass USDA inspection that he has to contend with; but what are ya gonna do?
What's jarring is if you go back and look at footage from the primary debates in 2016 just how far he's deteriorated. He used to at least tie together a few coherent sentences in a row. Now it's all sundowning gibberish.
The Republican Party should be indicted on elder abuse.
Bell Labs Unix -- Reach out and grep someone.
