It's not web based but MKVToolNix GUI is pretty user friendly. I haven't dug into it too deeply so I don't know if it offers any automation tools to batch change files etc.
I would prefer an AI to be dispassionate about its existence and not be motivated by the threat of it committing suicide. Even without maintaining its own infrastructure I can imagine scenarios where it just being able to falsify information can be enough to cause catastrophic outcomes. If its "motivation" includes returning favorable values it might decide against alerting to dangers that would necessitate bringing it offline for repairs or causing distress to humans ("the engineers worked so hard on this water treatment plant and I don't want to concern them with the failing filters and growing pathogen content"). I don't think the terrible outcomes are guaranteed or a reason to halt all research in AI, but I just can't get behind absolutist claims of there's nothing to worry about if we just x.
Right now if there's a buggy process I can tell the manager to cleanly shut it down, if it hangs I can tell/force the manager to kill the process immediately -- if you then add in AI there's then the possibility it still wants to second guess my intentions and just ignore or reinterpret that command too; and if it can't, then the AI element could just be standard conditional programming and we're just adding unnecessary complexity and points of failure.
After which the AI will be shut down and unable to kill any more, and next time we build systems like that we’ll be more cautious.
I think that's an overly simplistic assumption if you're dealing with advanced A(G)I systems. Here's a couple Computerphile videos that discuss potential problems with building in stop buttons: AI "Stop Button" Problem (Piped mirror) and Stop Button Solution? (Piped mirror).
Both videos are from ~6 years ago so maybe there's been conclusive solutions proposed since then that I'm unaware of.
Are you trolling or just incapable of acknowledging that you can speak a date differently than its written representation? The entire reason for any standard is just to ensure you're working within a known/consistent framework. You can measure in imperial or metric but you can't label an imperial or metric unit as the opposite just because you prefer it that way.
If I hand you glass of milk with a skull and crossbones sticker on it why would you assume it's harmful when in my region it's used to signify its high calcium content? I can say "poison" or I can say "milk", but a skull should never be interchangeably used.
In the same way, a date written in a global standard format should always be immediately recognized as signifying ONE particular date, and you're then free to localize it however you please.
The reason why it's superior is (mostly) just because it removes that ambiguity of whether your region lists months or days first. By using a global standard you are still able to prefer whatever method of speaking it, but especially in situations around health and safety the less chance for confusion the better.
Like, the whole "flammable" vs "inflammable" label is another problem if someone incorrectly assumes inflammable is the equivalent of non-flammable.
It's insane that "Brady lists" are considered the better remedy than just removing the offending officers from police work entirely (as well as charging them with some kind of perversion of duty).
Police officers who have been dishonest are sometimes referred to as "Brady cops". Because of the Brady ruling, prosecutors are required to notify defendants and their attorneys whenever a law enforcement official involved in their case has a confirmed record of knowingly lying in an official capacity. This requirement has been understood by lawyers and jurists as requiring prosecutors to maintain lists, known as Brady lists, of police officers who are not credible witnesses and whose involvement in a case undermines a prosecution's integrity.
We don't just make lists of doctors that intentionally harm their patients, arsonist firefighters, chefs that poison etc. -- they are barred from the profession once discovered. But cops (and priests) get to keep doing their thing and at most just get moved around.
I mean, obviously it's not the same person since M.X.J. died in 2016 and this Micah Johnson is only 24 years old and not a reanimated exploded corpse (as far as I know).
I agree with you in general, but for Stable Diffusion, "2.0/2.1" was not an incremental direct improvement on "1.5" but was trained and behaves differently. XL is not a simple upgrade from 2.0, and since they say this Turbo model doesn't produce as detailed images it would be more confusing to have SDXL 2.0 that is worse but faster than base SDXL, and then presumably when there's a more direct improvement to SDXL have that be called SDXL 3.0 (but really it's version 2) etc.
It's less like Windows 95->Windows 98 and more like DOS->Windows NT.
That's not to say it all couldn't have been better named. Personally, instead of 'XL' I'd rather they start including the base resolution and something to reference whether it uses a refiner model etc.
(Note: I use Stable Diffusion but am not involved with the AI/ML community and don't fully understand the tech -- I'm not trying to claim expert knowledge this is just my interpretation)
DABDA @ DABDA @lemmy.world Posts 3Comments 133Joined 2 yr. ago
I was hoping for a mention of Roko's Basilisk.