Guns are regulated. How much regulation, who gets allowed, what types of guns, and if the regulations are being enforced, those are the real questions. This warrant and shooting is a result of a law that wasn’t enforced well, as they had already broken the law once and yet someone sold/gave them guns again.
True of many things we take for granted now. It would be a different world entirely. Another non-computer example would be the 3-point seat belt that Volvo left as an open patent, saving countless lives over the past decades.
Or a different “feel” when turned on vs. off (more resistance or something). They spent effort printing all that text to show where the switch was when a universal 0/1 would have made it clear.
I can’t think of any example of a button or switch that by itself can be clear if it is engaged or not. A button could be assumed to be on if in, but that isn’t always the case, like for example with emergency stops.
Or full VR experience online eg. Neuromancer. Though even if the tech was available and fully tested and working, there are many pros and cons to all forms of enhancement or out-of-body existence, or a more extended life.
Be sure to not have throwable things around you if you haven’t heard about this before. Especially the amount of money that was being reported missing right before 9-11-2000, and suddenly was never brought up again.
The 6 foot distancing that wasn’t really ever followed well was a compromise to keep things open for the economy while pretending we’re doing something. What amazes me is how there wasn’t any mandate to require air filtration at key points in places with crowds - like a Corsi-Rosenthal box, the DIY stores could have had these in the front with a how-to-build and they would have made tons of profit while supplies lasted. I guess 6-foot stickers and signage was easier and cheaper. Remember when some stores tried to go further and enforce one way aisles?
(not so n)ice
Climate changes…abruptly.
More methane release overwhelms the natural breakdown agents in the atmosphere (hydroxyl radicals) so an increase bumps up the decay half life average and overall greenhouse gas effectiveness. We know there’s more methane leaks now due to both manmade sources as well as natural feedback loops from warming. Yet the IPCC still uses the older half life numbers for methane even now.
It’s talking about the annual global average, probably surface air since that’s mentioned later in the article. You’re right that it should be much more specific about what’s meant in the first sentence, not near the end.
Competition is no guarantee of improvement of product or service. Often it just ends up in a monopoly where both consumer and workers get burned while they’re told they are getting the best.
For a superpower they sure need a lot of practice.
You can update the test version all day long, you’ll never get better results than if you just push it to production. Fridays work the best.
Still better than Steve Bannon.
It changes so much so fast. For a video source to grasp the latest stuff I’d recommend the Youtube channel “AI Explained”.
True, and then because it’s a black box there wouldn’t be a known issue at all. Or maybe it would be much less of an issue because the words might have blended others into the mix, and his style wouldn’t be as obvious in the outputs, and/or it would be easier to dismiss. Did the training involve actual input of his name, or was that pulled from the source trained on? How much control was in the training?
I totally agree with you on protecting the basics of creativity and growth. I think the core issue is using “imitate” here. Is that what the LLM is doing, or is that an anthropomorphism of some sense that there’s intelligence guiding the process? I know it seems like I’m nitpicking things to further my point, but the fact that this is an issue to many even outside artwork says there is a question here of what is and isn’t okay.
In the context of LLMs, I think that means giving them access to their own outputs in some way.
That’s what the AUTOGPTs do (as well as others, there’s so many now) they pick apart the task into smaller things and feed the results back in, building up a final result, and that works a lot better than just a one time mass input. The biggest advantage and main reason for these being developed was to keep the LLM on course without deviation.
And yet the artist’s name is used to push the weights towards pictures in their style. I don’t know what the correct semantics are for it, nor the legalities. That’s part of the problem, the tech is ahead of our laws, as is usually the case.
I did comment that enforcement seemed to be part of the problem here, yes. Do the laws need to be more strict? I doubt that will fix any enforcement, since that’s the failure.