porcoesphino

I don’t think the memes will be as good as the blue check, but I imagine some outcomes will be about as problematic

It also very effectively provided roads to make it easier for migrants to cross the border

Anyone have a link to the analysis that said this, or is it just something I remember the internet saying once?

🤦‍♂️ Thanks

I don’t see anything there that indicates an AI positive agenda. What am I missing?

Why is this being downvoted so heavily?

Even with the comment making a lot of sense, if someone has a good summary / write up / video that helps build an intuition or understanding a bit more of thermodynamics then I’d love the recommendation

please don’t drag me into “bias people” conversation

This whole part is very confusing, and I think you a misreading “you’re going to bias”. Like priming. Say “look at the quality of this” to certain people and they’re far more likely to say it’s beautiful even if they know nothing about it. In this case, being ignorant but trusting can be harmful. Agreed there are some that have no lookalikes. I think we disagree about how much you can trust different sources and how important it is to make that point vs keep beginners overly cautious

I’m pretty ignorant here but my time on iNaturalist disagrees. I also think that if you’re going to bias people one way or another then biasing them to know the look a-likes is important, and promoting being cavalier is a bit reckless

I don’t think there is a federal law, just some state laws and you can complicate those by using federal officers. This is the best summary I’ve seen:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mXvbMaYQiRQ

I wouldn’t even say clueless, he’s from Brasil. Name some Candomblé holidays and how they attend. Most tourists don’t know the religious holidays or the practices of the places they’re visiting. The synagogue isn’t saying it was based in bigotry.

That said, a visiting law professor breaking car windows with a BB gun raises enough eyebrows on its own.

I think the first part you wrote is a bit hard to parse but I think this is related:

I think the problematic part of most genAI use cases is validation at the end. If you’re doing something that has a large amount of exploration but a small amount of validation, like this, then it’s useful.

A friend was using it to learn the linux command line, that can be framed as having a single command at the end that you copy, paste and validate. That isn’t perfect because the explanation could still be off and it wouldn’t be validated but I think it’s still a better use case than most.

If you’re asking for the grand unifying theory of gravity then:

• validation isn’t built into the task (so you’re unlikely to do it with time).
• validation could be as time intensive as the task (so there is no efficiency gain if you validate).
• its beyond your ability to validate so if it says nice things about you then a subset of people will decide the tool is amazing.

It’s an NBC news poll so I’m not sure it’s easy to find much more info on the poll or its history.

Here’s a chart showing previous responses:

Fuck the YouTube PMs

They were condescending on the bug with the fourth highest internal ratings that simply requested that shorts could be removed (particularly for children and for mental health). A particular gripe of some engineers was that it couldn’t be removed from the subscriptions page. I was impressed they removed the condescending comment after a month but they never really addressed the large volume of employees telling them this was the wrong thing to be doing

we?

Oooh. This is the guy that spammed multiple channels with multiple links for basically the same story. Maybe people are downvoting for that / the username

Oooh. I didn’t notice the downvotes here are 1/3 of the upvotes, about the same ratio as the original post

Why the down votes for this?