Probably trying to mirror Reddit, which had /r/politics for US, and /r/worldnews for everything else. There was a lot of effort (probably wrongly) to try and copy Reddit over instead of finding new ways to do things. /r/worldpolitics was the original sub, but there’s an interesting drama story there.
If Lemmy and other fediverse discussion areas had developed slower and more naturally there might have been more of a country/instance symmetry, but anyone who was around when the Reddit implosion and migration happened knows that it was total chaos and a grab bag of where a new user should sign up. Lemmy and the rest were not ready for such a shift, and now that everyone’s been in a place or two for a while, short of a closure or blocking or whatever there’s no reason to move around to a matching country and instance, if there even is one. People mainly look for popularity, activity, themes, and engagement, and if that’s found on the other side of the globe it works.
Any questionable acts would happen after the movie’s end. My thoughts have always been what the effects were to Susan once she saw he was telling the truth. We don’t even really get that short of the look of amazement, and maybe shock on her face.
It depends. If it’s on the side of the road it may do the opposite and jump in front of you. This one actually looked like it was going to start moving, but not a chance.
It’s the gap between where the deer is in the dark and the car in front that’s odd. Only thing I can figure is the person was in the other lane and darted over just after passing the deer.
Is there a longer video anywhere? Looking closely I have to wonder where the hell did that deer come from? There’s a car up ahead of the Tesla in the same lane, I presume quickly moved back in once it passed the deer? The deer didn’t spook or anything from that car?
This would have been hard for a human driver to avoid hitting, but I know the issue is the right equipment would have been better than human vision, which should be the goal. And it didn’t detect the impact either since it didn’t stop.
But I just think it’s peculiar that that deer just literally popped there without any sign of motion.
That’ll get them. No one under 15 has any idea what a VPN is.
“Are you 15 or more years old? Y/N”
There, that fixed the problem.
Maybe it’s not the right place for it, but the mentions of AI safety and safety in general don’t pertain to the actual definition of AI safety as used in AI research. No mention of alignment parameters that are needed to be held to. This reads as a “we need to be careful who gets access to this” vs. any warning to AI companies on their direction and haste.
Make your own dystopia, Elon. Stop copying people.
And call it heaven. Any type of eternity where there isn’t some opt-out clause is hell, even if it starts off great. One where your single job is to unendingly flatter the guy in the Bible? That’s hell from the start.
The flaw of the question is assuming there is a clear dividing line between species. Evolutionary change is a continuous process. We only have dividing lines where we see differences in long dead ones in the fossil record, or we see enough differences in living ones. The question has no answer, only a long explanation of how that isn’t how any of this works.
Even a hypothetically true artificial general intelligence would still not be a moral agent
That’s a deep rabbit hole that can’t be stated as a known fact. It’s absolutely true right now with LLMs, but at some point the line could be crossed. If and when, how, and by what definition has been a long debate nowhere near resolved.
It’s highly possible that AGI/ASI could come about and be both super intelligent and self conscious and still have no sense of morality. But how can we at human levels even comprehend what’s possible? There’s the real danger, we have no idea what we could be heading towards.
I wanted to jump into using Peertube, but unfortunately Youtube grew enormous because it was the only thing at the time. Pulling people from it to other platforms with less viewers and usually no compensation is tough. (although YT compensation as of late is a joke as well)
Thorium was being tested for viability alongside uranium, and got scrapped not because it wasn’t a feasible design, but because it couldn’t produce weapon grade material as a byproduct. Some countries are finally exploring thorium again, hopefully with some success.
Keep in mind that at the core of an LLM is it being a probability autocompletion mechanism using the vast training data is was fed. A fine tuned coding LLM would have data more in line to suit an output of coding solutions. So when you ask for generation of code for very specific purposes, it’s much more likely to find a mesh of matches that will work well most of the time. Be more generic in your request, and you could get all sorts of things, some that even look good at first glance but have flaws that will break them. The LLM doesn’t understand the code it gives you, nor can it reason if it will function.
Think of an analogy where you Googled a coding question and took the first twenty hits, and merged all the results together to give an answer. An LLM does a better job that this, but the idea is similar. If the data it was trained on was flawed from the beginning, such as what some of the hits you might find on Reddit or Stack Overflow, how can it possibly give you perfect results every time? The analogy is also why a much narrow query for coding may work more often - if you Google a niche question you will find more accurate, or at least more relevant results than if you just try a general search and past together anything that looks close.
Basically, if you can help the LLM hone in its probabilities on the better data from the start, you’re more likely to get what may be good code.
Then there’s the waste product to consider.
No, not from nuclear. That’s an issue to be dealt with certainly, but I’m talking about the waste from the production and disposal of solar panels that is ongoing because they don’t last forever.
Quite the opposite, starting in the 1970s. We’d have a lot more nuclear power and less red tape had the petroleum industry and politics not put a scare into the public about the nuclear boogeyman. Your comment above about nuclear bombs is precisely the angle they took, using the tension with Russia as a prop for inaccurate science claims.
Pictures as proof have been questionable for a while if a good photoshopper creates something. It was video that was much harder. AI still isn’t perfect, but a short moving clip along with AI audio can fool many people now.
tries to hack into it
“Oh no, someone is trying to hack into me too!”
They’ll be told that the “other people” are also being hurt, so they’ll be happy.