Certain events like marathon swimming and triathlon can’t be done in a pool.
Certain events like marathon swimming and triathlon can’t be done in a pool.
Yeah that’s fair… Bad example :p
It’s like a vicious cycle:
AI is going to make it so much worse. You’ll soon be in the top 5% if you have a keyboard app installed on your phone.
Iirc it peaked at around 30% market share. I think IE was around 60% at the time. So never dominant, but definitely very very widespread.
I’m curious, are these hallucinations very prevalent? I’m outside under US so haven’t seen the feature yet. But I have noticed that practically every article references the same glue incident.
So I’m not sure if the hallucinations are happening all the time, or everyone is just jumping on a handful of mistakes the AI made. If the latter, the situation reminds me of how every single accident involving a Tesla was reported on back in the day.
I can think of a couple examples, like leaving the boot loader unlocked on their pixel phones. You might be right though.
Google’s too smart for that. They know there’s a big backlash against AI in the tech savvy crowd and that it’s bleeding users to competitors. So they offer this escape valve that they know the techies will easily find and use, but which 99% of the population will never even look for. This way they can still push AI on almost everyone while at the same time retain as many disgruntled techies as they can.
Not disagreeing with the sentiment… But how is this Reddit’s fault? This is entirely on Google.
Microsoft argues that its AI automation will remove the boring bits of jobs instead of replacing jobs entirely.
This argument is such bullshit. As if Microsoft doesn’t know there exist jobs that are entirely “the boring bits”.
Yes, everyone deserves a bullshit free social experience. You’re more than welcome to go start your own instance that only federates with other hardcore nerd instances
You’re correct that most 5 year olds cannot read… However there’s so much you can do without knowing how to read. Plus kids are very good at pressing buttons and can figure stuff out by trial and error.
I think you’re overstating the compute power and understating the amount of cardboard Amazon uses
Namecheap supports ddns out of the box too, no additional service required. You just need a cron job that calls their API to update your IP periodically.
Not obvious to me at all. It doesn’t follow that because a country helped fight genocide in the past that somehow makes them incapable of perpetrating it themselves? Makes no logical sense.
How so?
No.
And that doesn’t make me stupid because there exist times I say yes.
Good context to have!
I’m not commenting on this particular case because I’m uninformed, the Times very well could have completely shit the bed here.
But one difference between a news outlet and an every day citizen is that a news outlet pretty much has to report on what the government’s position is. If the white house claims there are WMD’s, that’s something the public needs to know. Of course the language around how that gets presented is everything!
It sounds like there was too much blind trust in that statement and the language didn’t leave enough room for scepticism in this particular case. But it’s worth remembering that in other cases there’s a difference between towing the line and reporting words as a statement of fact. The fact being that the words were said but not necessarily that the words are true.
Regarding the WMD thing, was it proven the Times was aware of the mistakes and published anyway? Or were they also deceived by the government like everyone else?
I’m not American and I almost never read the Times, so I don’t have first hand experience. But I hear the same rhetoric about outlets here in Canada.
My take is that yes, outlets can have bias on certain issues, but that doesn’t mean we should write them off completely. Trust in media is at an all time low, journalism is struggling to survive. There’s no media outlet in the world that doesn’t make the kinds of mistakes that you outline here. The key is how do they respond to them after the fact. Do they issue corrections? How quickly? Where do they put them?
Some of your ‘evidence’ also doesn’t seem like journalistic malpractice. For example, are they obfuscating poor sources, or not revealing an anonymous source? The latter is not malpractice. The former doesn’t sound bad either… Who decides if a source is poor? Maybe the source didn’t have much to contribute so that’s why there wasn’t much detail on their background. I’m not arguing that you’re wrong, just that as an outside observer that point doesn’t seem very bad.
Anyway, I do think it’s important to be aware of any biases in the media we consume, so conversations like this are important. But my fear is that if the conclusion is to wholesale stop trusting the media anytime they make a mistake or a bias is revealed (I.e all media outlets), we’re going to be even more fucked than we already are.
From the post: