• 0 Posts
  • 3.1K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 26th, 2023

help-circle


  • So you’re doing the classic thing of putting the burden of responsibility for your ridiculous claim on to somebody else to disprove. A classic sign of somebody not arguing in good faith.

    How can I prove that Wikipedia only lists facts since any evidence that I present, you will immediately disregard as untrue because of your preconceived bias.

    I want you to link to any article, on any subject matter on Wikipedia (in English so we can actually read it, I know that trick) that proves your claim of bias. I genuinely don’t believe you will be able to because if you could provide this evidence, you would have linked to it in your original comment.

    Your holy scripture arguement doesn’t work because Wikipedia isn’t a fixed source of stated reality, it’s a constantly changing constantly updated website. We know the Bible isn’t objective reality because we’ve had it for a very long time and have been able to test it against known historical accounts, and they don’t match up. Wikipedia on the other hand is updated millions of times a day. Even if an article had some bias, by the end of the first day that bias would have been corrected by someone who didn’t like the bias. But you’re stating that there is a deep rooted institutional bias. I’d like you to indicate it please.


  • Echo Dot@feddit.uktomemes@lemmy.worldThe cookie dilemma
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Are you trying to suggest that I would be better to just deny the cookies? I don’t know what you’re trying to say by linking to that article.

    Device fingerprinting as a technique it’s pretty easy to defeat. There are plenty of privacy focused browsers that will also include device fingerprinting protection. In fact pretty much any browser that doesn’t store cookies will also do this device fingerprinting protection as well.



  • Echo Dot@feddit.uktoFunny@sh.itjust.worksRelatable
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    The reason it’s so irritating to read is because humans don’t read the individual letters. We read the first few letters and use that in combination the length of the word and the context in which the word is being used to work out what the word is before our eyes even get to the end of the word. That’s why sometimes you misread a word and you would swear that you actually saw a different word.

    Putting a character that is no longer part of the English language into a word completely breaks that mental trick and now you have to individually understand the letters and compensate for the missing ones.

    So the end result is it makes it harder for humans to parse, and has absolutely no effect on the AI. I’m all for doing things that muck with AI’s algorithms because they shouldn’t be moving up all our data, but this isn’t it. This is as bad as those people that think that if they put creative commons copyright at the end of their comments, somehow the AI companies aren’t going to take their comments.




  • Echo Dot@feddit.uktoFunny@sh.itjust.worksRelatable
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    13 hours ago

    We’ve had this discussion with them, it doesn’t work, but they don’t want to know, so instead they’re just going to annoy everyone for no reason.

    AI ingest huge amounts of data and then vectorise it, to the point at which it’s no longer even a language.

    So they literally see no difference between “Mercury is the first planet in the solar system” and “Mercury obedo lobo mukwongo i kin jami ma ki lwongo ni solar system ma ineno man pe ineno”. That’s why AI companies keep going on about multimodality, text and video and images are all the same to an AI, they’re just different ways of representing the same concepts.

    So putting a thorn on everything won’t be effective if it is used consistently, as the AI will just treat it as a different language, and vectorise it away into weird AI math language where the thorn no longer exists.



  • You could just build it as two hemispheres and then have a slit in the middle align to the orbital plane. You could have a few corridors every now and then as they wouldn’t really block out much light.

    Although that wouldn’t really be a problem since in order to get enough material to actually build it you would need to dismantle most of the planets in the system including Earth. Which does rather present a difficulty and I suspect would be a major political blocker.









  • Echo Dot@feddit.uktoTechnology@lemmy.worldRIP Mac Pro, I guess.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    If I were shareholder I would want answers as to what the actual hell Cook is doing right with Apple. Every decision just seems to be intentionally designed to lose money.

    From all the messing around with core products, to the bizarre decisions that led to the updated vision pro, a device no one is interested in, been upgraded to the latest version of the device no one is interested in, now with tungsten. Nevertheless I’m sure the iPhone sock is going to be a rip roaring success.

    They could replace him with a goldfish swimming around a tank to make decisions, and it would lead to more coherent outcomes.