while noble, basically any western system will punish such behaviour as assault ... perhaps this point could be expressed as a prefererence for the law to change such that deprivation of privacy becomes a valid self defense argument ... in the meantime there do exist passive defenses such as face masks designed to interfere with facial recognition
I believe the argument is that introducing personal aspects like this friend foe business inherently serves to increase argumentative bias and reduce quality of discussion. personally this seems like a slop project either way , so regardless as to how beneficial it could be, I'm still going to behave toxically towards it - if you really love or hate someone so much , you would have memorized their name already !
> Chief Executive Zubin Appoo said in the statement. “I am prepared to say this clearly: the era of manually writing code as the core act of engineering is over.”
if i was a software engineer i too would probably think that software is the core of engineering ...
i'd also say the same thing as this c suiter if my company was failing and needed to cut costs without scaring the investors !
cant believe i never noticed the quote thing before. tis a mere a matter of time before these tropes become redundant , but for the moment they are very useful to memorize. thank you for sharing.
i tried using your website. it mostly works but it broke a little bit:
Anthropic parse error: ```json { "score": 15, "reasons": [ "Strong personal voice with natural argumentative tone and direct confrontat
There is no "good will" argument being made here. The state doesn't care about good, it cares about it's own survival. Being independent from foreign interference in the software they use and having deep insight into what residents within the territory of that state are talking about are critical to that mission. It has nothing to do with morals. It is a machine.
EU chat control is also better than American government spying on American tech companies (which is effectively a kind of EU Chat Control, except its USA who gets to spy). Both are bad, but one is less bad.
Yeah, I agree with you both. Lesser evils do exist. At least there's some pretense of democracy and not just spy on everyone without limit without telling anyone. If it wasn't for Snowden, it'd still just be us "conspiracy theorists". (Anyone remember the 90s?)
For the average citizen absolutely not there is no free speech in the EU any form of EU chat control will result in constant arrests for what should be perfectly legal speech.
now ive been wondering - what is the polite way to exit a conversation when it becomes obvious that your fellow interlocutor is merely a chunk of electric meat redirecting the output of sam altman? im talking blatantly obvious eg. 'its not x, its y' multiple times in the same paragraph.
What an odd question. If the other entity is an AI, there is no need to be polite.
But personally, if I get value out of a conversation, I will continue. If I don't, I'll stop responding. Whether or not the other side is an AI is only relevant if I think I'm building some kind of rapport or friendship with someone. Otherwise what matters is if the comments makes me think, or makes me want to write something. If only AI bots were reading the comments, that would be a bigger issue than if the specific comment I'm replying to is AI-written.
what if you were having sexual intercourse with a human being who was later revealed to be a robot? all the sensations felt identical to you either way. but you still didn't make love.
This is utterly bizarre. Yes, what if? It would depend what you're after. Very few of us entirely detach sex from emotions even when we think we do, and so it's a very different scenario. But even then, plenty time f people use sex toys. Meanwhile, I have conversations all the time without any emotional attachment whatsoever.
I find it odd that, when it comes to natural language, we all agree that the LLM is stuck in an uncanny valley, yet no one is acknowledging that the code it generates has a similar alien feel to it.
I don't think this is productive. You can already adjust the style of LLMs and it's only going to get better over time. Any tool or strategy you come up with for detecting a bot can then be turned into an generative adversarial network to effectively create a system that breaks the tool.
The bots are going to win this war. I'm not sure of the implications of what this means though.
Well, the first implication is that online politics becomes even more of an astroturfed disaster area than it already is. Quite possibly democracy as a concept splits into two halves:
- "control plane", a media ecosystem where everything could be fake
- "ground plane", in-person gatherings and demonstrations, which are much harder to fake but have extremely limited access to information and are easily suppressed
I don't see why you'd take it to such an extreme. All it would mean is that chatter on medium to large open media is largely fake. Not necessarily a bad thing since a significant minority of it already is, but many people don't realize. But you'd still have endless personal networks, friends from real life, and so on.
I think the general outcome is simply a devaluing of open online chatter as a whole, which I definitely don't see as a bad thing.
thats definitely the way i feel using the net now. but expressing it that way can be kinda rude, coz some people naturally write like the sam altman machine. i tried pointing out repeated use of ai grammar techniques, that seemed to me to be the middle ground between wasting my time and being a dick to others. but pointing out ai grammar techniques got me flagged here. anyone got a better middle ground?
whatever way you want to express it, a subset of people have been linguistically roboticized and talk like robots now. regardless as to how natural it is, these people are definitely talking like that, and it is difficult to verbally distinguish them from the robots they emulate
look man youre right semantically in that llms are trained for maximum engagement its just not the conversation im looking for right now , all the best
Given that you're citing Wikipedia on this, the issue of detecting and fighting auto-generated slop in articles is actually quite fascinating.
There was a really interesting talk given by Mathias Shindler (long time editor of German Wikipedia) at the 39C3 conference about this topic a few months back that is worth a watch for anyone interested in the issue: https://youtu.be/fKU0V9hQMnY
i intended to ask what the difference was between two browsers that are both beholden to a company whose express goal is to suck up personal data. so far ive gotten vitriol, AI, and downvotes. my actual question remains unanswered. if you'd like to answer the question that would be cool! but yeah if you dont want to answer , it'd probably be easier to say nothing than to tell me to die alone
reply