I’d be down with banning everyone from social media

Do you seriously need someone to explain the difference, or are you just being contrary for its own sake?

There’s a disturbing number of creeps ITT arguing that they should be allowed to film people without their knowledge on the subway

The kind of people they’re pissing off with this, are the same people most likely to switch to bittorrent.

Not even a good film.

One of the many stupid things about it is that generally speaking, most measures to reduce cars have the effect of making car travel more pleasant. It’s building tons of extra lanes that drives its own demand and makes driving slow and unpleasant.

My 3rd generation iPad became functionally useless after only 6-7 years even though the hardware was pristine. Almost half of the apps on it, including some major ones like YouTube, started refusing to run because they had a mandatory Update, and the App Store wouldn’t provide updates for the newest iOS version that the 3rd gen could support.

Meanwhile my Windows laptop that I bought at the same time is still in service after 12 years. Windows going out of support just means you don’t get the security updates; Apple going out of support means they’ll brick your machine.

Fuck Apple to infinity.

They spend over £50,000,000/year on care, research, and conservation.

A significant portion of what we know about the ancient world is a direct result of their research sharing and activities; for example when the Rosetta Stone was in French hands they kept it to themselves, when it was in Egypt they did nothing with it, but when it came to Britain it was shared with research departments across Europe as well as in Britain, resulting in our ability today to read hieroglyphics and demotic script.

Think about that for a second: if the Rosetta Stone had been left in Egypt, there’s every possibility that Egyptians today would still have no idea about most of their own history or how to read their own ancient texts. You might dismiss this as paternalistic or white-savioury, but it’s true nonetheless.

Even as recently as last year we had researchers finding things like https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/babylonian-map-world-0021631 that simply wouldn’t have happened without the British Museum’s work. So, I’m inclined to cut them some slack.

People give the British Museum a lot of shit, but it’s free all year round for everyone.

Epic Boss Tim Sweeney can go fuck himself

If you can’t get your LLM to not deny the holocaust, then your LLM is not ready to get platformed on a major internet site.

Repost bot

Blocked

LOL

Hard disagree, because it’s like with all the other forms of AI-created slop - with the real thing there’s layers of meaning, and you spend time and mental energy digging into that and getting something from it. But as with AI art and AI prose, you try looking closer at it and it just makes you feel hollow and frustrated at having wasted your time.

There was no meaning, there was no symbolism, there were no clever literary allusions, there was no interplay between the melody and the lyrics, it’s just superficial garbage that tricks you into giving it attention by sounding good on its first listen.

(Edit: lol touched a nerve with some shit talentless musicians)

unimpressed with the ability to talk fluently with an AI computer.

That fluency is a pure illusion. Either he doesn’t know this, or he thinks we don’t.

deleted by creator

All I’m seeing there is he decided to deliberately did something wrong on behalf of an imaginary person and then complain that doing the deliberately wrong thing broke the computer.

But what if bias was not the reason? What if your face gave genuinely useful clues about your probable performance?

I hate this so much, because spouting statistics is the number one go-to of idiot racists and other bigots trying to justify their prejudices. The whole fucking point is that judging someone’s value someone based on physical attributes outside their control, is fucking evil, and increasing the accuracy of your algorithm only makes it all the more insidious.

The Economist has never been shy to post some questionable kneejerk shit in the past, but this is approaching a low even for them. Not only do they give the concept credibility, but they’re even going out of their way to dishonestly paint it as some sort of progressive boon for the poor.

Define “held accountable”?

If you mean who will pay out if there’s an accident, presumably Waymo will have found an insurer willing to cover them. But if you mean that someone out there must be punished to satisfy some sense of vengeance, then you may want to re-examine your values.

Marrow was interested in “how public institutions decide what’s worth showing, and what happens when something outside that system appears within it”.

Wanky pretentious edgelord crap. It’s obvious what happens when you put up a shit AI-generated poster in a museum without permission. Someone asks the staff why there’s a shit AI-generated poster on the wall and they take it down. Other artists have done the “sneaking something into a gallery” thing way better than this many times before.

Sure, Art is supposed to make you think and react. But art that makes you think “wow that guy completely failed at every aspect of this” is of no value. The true scandal isn’t that he did it, it’s that some dumbfuck at the BBC thought it was worth reporting on.