Every neural net is a multi-dimensional model; there is nothing new about this, and the anthropomophizing of Claude doesn't mimic human consciousness. All computers behave like humans because humans invented them and interface with them; we humans are their root.

The data training of all LLMs has been human-based data. So if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's still a duck, and not a human.

The attempt to make AI appear human is also related to its legal status, and many are trying to goad public policy into recognizing AI agents, MPC and RPC, as humans for legal purposes. It's programmed date in matrices. Don't guild the lily, or in some cases, the turd.

Don't let them. It's both ethically, and morally incorrect to do so. Placing trust in AI is the same trust that corporations should have; which is none, as their vehicles designed to aid their investors, and *no one else*.

Insane Clown Posse, is that you?

Once they realized you'd pay the hire price, if the fees are gone, the businesses are just going to go 'yummy more money for me'.

This is dumb shit. Many stores around me explicitly charge you the difference if you pay by credit card to cover the service fee.

I have never had my debit card compromised. Ever. The fact that it's a direct line is what makes it not usable to buy things online, etc (generally). But it's very nice to use in person - I like that when I spend money, I'm actually spending it and not creating debt. (Don't get me wrong, I always pay off my credit card bills every month, which are not trivial sums .. but I'm only using them because they're the only things you can use online.)

Credit cards, on the other hand - we all pay for the insurance. It's not really the banks problem, its a problem that you have protection for because you pay for it.

"Just give me 1% in cash"

That's still money that comes from somewhere. Like .. from you.

"An opt-out setting that quietly ships settings data off-device is exactly the sort of thing that adds to administrators' workloads rather than lightening them."

Fine, but there's *tons* of them. This is a drip in an ocean. The opposite, settings you need to turn on are also fucking huge depending on the corperate environment it's used in. I mean, fiddling over one setting on a product with a user base as huge and diverse as Windows is nitpicking imo.

Places that have to deal with this are setup to be proactive about the larger problem set.

yeah, damnit, we can't charge you X so we can give X - some amount back to you and call it a reward

fucking reward schemes suck

The only way you'd know the majority of any group of people would be biblically, scumbag.

"the manager" lol you sound like you work at a gas station

Indeed, because lemmings are always known for that.

And it has always been thus.

Stacking is not new. Heat dispersion problems that kill it are not new. A chip when heat-dispersed with a heat sink apparatus has known characteristics, but non-linear things happen when you heat both sides without some kind of temperature control method; chips bend, and then strange things happen.

This is news to cook the stock price, and maybe this generation of "advance".

It's not cool to anonymously post stupid shit just so you can stage fake replies to it; it means you're a loser.

Just an observation.

True, misinformation coming from "trusted" sources is much more damaging than some idiot with a blog posting nonsense, simply by the fact that it's framed as something trusted by so many others.

False dichotomy. Nobody here is talking about an idiot with a blog posting nonsense.

False information coming from sources that "look" trustable but are actually not are very damaging - on purpose, as that is literally the intent.

Incomplete/biased information from trustable sources that are not deliberately attempting to mislead (as in sources that adhere to the ethics of not presenting information that is factually false, even if the picture is not "complete" as you suggest) is a slight wrong, and has existed since the dawn of the printed word - it's editorial in nature - but its effects on creating social problems pales in comparison to weaponized disinformation campaigns.

Hand-wringing about the later as if it's some kind of new thing, or something most people don't know about strikes me as super naive. The insidiousness of the former is simply that people don't appreciate the scale to which it's happening.

No, but treating two wrongs as the same degree of wrongness is pretty dumb.

Or just shit like this: https://www.wsj.com/business/m...