At this time of year! At this time of day! In this part of the country! Localized entirely within your kitchen?!?

oh stop your outrage, saying that it was a contractor is just context, not an excuse.

But that is what the whole discussion is about. Many scenarios aren’t just gambling because they have a degree of predictability to it: poker, stock market, betting on the day when the US starts WW3.

Probably only quantum processes are truly random, but for this argument, processes are practically random if the governing variables are not human-knowable. A dice throw, roulette, lottery numbers drawn from a bowl. They are deep down deterministic, but not predictable to any degree.

how did you come to this conclusion? betting on scenarios that are purely random are just gambling.

I mean, it is both?

what makes you think advances in LLMs have anything to do with ML for Computer vision? If you wanted the latter, you would’ve gotten that way cheaper than by training on reddit text.

12 upvotes for this thin conspiracy theory, congrats Lemmy.

I’m thinking more broadly. Think about WiFi mapping for localization, crowd sourced geo data like traffic warnings, health data tracking, cashless payment, smart home applications, etc. All of them provide real benefit to people but right now, they are a facade for corporate profit interests.

honest question to a philosophy major, why is it so clear cut to you that LLMs are not sentient? what is missing in current systems?

it baffles me how many people in here apparently don’t have the reading comprehension to understand your second sentence. I swear Lemmy is even dumber than reddit.

You are refuting something that wasn’t said. of course Turing machines cannot compute everything.

i think that a lot recently. so many great technologies that cannot be trusted in the hands of corporations. and sadly, people then reject technology instead of demanding a version in public domain.

There is more than one attack vector.

Is it advisable to use biometrics to lock your phone if you are part of an at-risk demographic? no

Are biometric second factor an improvement over people only setting shitty passwords? yes

Do phishing attacks occur orders of magnitude more frequently than biometric factors being gathered by force? Absolutely.

ahahaha such a shit take

Do you want to talk about it?

Really a non sequitur. you could have one course “healthy use of new technology” and ban it for the rest of the school day for distraction-free learning.

thanks for the explanation. I misunderstood the statement. makes more sense that it makes fingerprinting harder.

what does that even mean? what aspect is more generic that could be used for fingerprinting?

We definitely have some control over each of those points:

• We don’t let kids drive, the lowest driving age seems to be 15 and is usually 18: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_driving_ages. Kids obv would have access to their parents cars.
• Knives, Guns etc cannot be sold to children and I hope you would agree that this is a good thing.
• having sex shouldn’t be controlled but providing or paying for sex work, “adult” events, sex parties etc definitely should be restricted.
• Legal drugs (alcohol, tobacco, weed) should be restricted for children. Illegal drugs are indeed hard to specifically regulate but e. g. selling illegal substances to a minor should carry a higher sentence.

after typing all that out I wonder what we are even debating. those are obvious examples to me where actual restriction is necessary. and to cycle back to the start, why would media be fundamentally exempt from that?

so somebody with zero programming skills and therefore zero experience with coding agents deemed AI assisted code such a big problem that they performatively forked a project at an arbitrary point. And they want to maybe maintain it while the whole issue started when the original maintainer said the project is too big to be maintained without assistance.

what are we doing here?

Thanks for clarifying.

For the record, I think this mechanism is indeed far reaching, simply because the current criterion of “age” is arbitrary in the proposed mechanism.

Not sure if the “just education” part is realistic, though. The whole point is that children cannot make responsible decisions like adults can. We accept that for driving, sex, drugs and weapons.