Lovable Sidekick @ LovableSidekick @lemmy.world

Posts

22

Comments

3,094

Joined

9 mo. ago

I see this as the 2025 equivalent of the entertainment industry's collective backlash against Napster back in the day. The issue will probably be decided by courts and legislatures, as before, and that legal decision will be transmuted into fierce morality, as before. The major difference is that in 1999 the legal combatants were a whole industry vs a handful of software developers and basically Lawrence Lessig, whereas with AI they're all corporations with tons of money at stake. So the outcome could easily be very different this time, and our crowdsourced moral standards could follow suit.

Good question, and I dunno, but I wouldn't think an invitee has the power to invite others. Seems kind of dodgy.

"geriatrics reliving the past glory of the 60’s" ?

I get that saying anything positive about boomers is pretty much against the rules of social media, but for fuck's sake dude, you're talking about people who are out there actually trying to do something for the world instead of thumb-typing nihilism into their phones. No respect at all?

Hearts

Too many people's idea of activism now is to rant on social media and downvote all the bad thoughts. "I'm raising awareness!"

No dude I'm not under that impression, and I'm not going to take an quiz from you to prove I understand how LLMs work. I'm fine with you not agreeing with me.

your call

I doubt that this would affect vampires at all. The rule is that they can't enter your house without being invited, not that they have to move if you build a house around them.

Police don't typically execute search warrants alone. If I knew that specific policeman was a vampire I would address his partner(s) individually and invite them in, but I would not invite the vampire. Explaining to them why he was staying outside would be his problem.

No, I didn't start by predicting a series of words, I already had thoughts on the subject, which existed completely outside of this thread. By the way, I've been working on a scenario for my D&D campaign where there's an evil queen who rules a murky empire to the East. There's a race of uber-intelligent ogres her mages created, who then revolted. She managed to exile the ogres to a small valley once they reached a sort of power stalemate. She made a treaty with them whereby she leaves them alone and they stay in their little valley and don't oppose her, or aid anyone who opposes her. I figured somehow these ogres, who are generally known as "Bane Ogres" because of an offhand comment the queen once made about them being the bane of her existence - would convey information to the player characters about a key to her destruction, but because of their treaty they have to do it without actually doing it. Not sure how to work that yet. Anyway, the point of this is that the completely out-of-context information I just gave you is in no way related to what we were talking about and wasn't inspired by constructing a series of relevant words like you're proposing. I also enjoy designing and printing 3d objects and programming little circuit thingys called ESP32 to do home automation. I didn't get interested in that because of this thread, and I can't imagine how a LLM-like mental process would prompt me to tell you about it, or why I would think you would be interested in knowing anything about my hobbies. Anyway, nice talking to you. Cute theory you got there about brain function tho, I can tell you've know people inside out.

For one thing, the economic boom of the 1950s was an anomaly, largely driven by years of enforced saving during WWII, at least in America. Many consumer goods here were either rationed or unavailable during the war, but there was full employment for war production and those jobs paid well. So people were making good money and didn't have a lot to spend it on. So they bought war bonds or just saved up. A few years after the war ended, when industry had shifted back to producing consumer goods, people had a lot of money to spend. Sales fueled more jobs and higher pay, fueling more sales etc. That was the 50s boom in a nutshell.

By 1960 all the savings had been spent and consumption was slacking off. But the business world didn't want the boom to end, so they started handing out consumer credit like candy. Consumers also didn't want it to end, so they eagerly bought on credit. Constantly owing money became the norm, and now the average American family carries like $15,000 in credit debt, excluding mortagages.

I think the only way we can achieve a boomer-like lifestyle for everybody will take massive changes in how we run the economy. The current system will just keep shoveling profits into the hands of a very small number of very wealthy people. Automation will keep eliminating more and more jobs - but the theoretical endpoint of that is a stat, where the economy collapses because there are too few people with incomes who can afford to buy anything. Reforming our economy before it gets to that point will be a survival issue, not a political one.

I'm in Seattle too. Bite your tongue, today is perfect!

This quote is often attributed to Mark Twain, but he isn't known to have said it. Could be based on a similar statement about Paris by an English actor named James Quin in the 1700s.

It's always fun and games until somebody calls the cops.

Completely disagree. Summer is my favorite season and would remain so in the complete absence of PR.

This post reminds me of a friend in the ad business who told me people only think iced drinks taste better because in the early 1900s some advertising genius created a campaign to convince people of that. No, sorry, cold drinks are more refreshing. The ancient Romans thought so too, and used to haul ice down from the Alps, centuries before the advertising industry even existed.

Wow. So when you typed that comment you were just predicting which words would be normal in this situation? Interesting delusion, but that's not how people think. We apply reasoning processes to the situation, formulate ideas about it, and then create a series of words that express our ideas. But our ideas exist on their own, even if we never end up putting them into words or actions. That's how organic intelligence differs from a Large Language Model.

Amen! When I say the same things this author is saying I get, "It'S NoT StAtIsTiCs! LeArN aBoUt AI bEfOrE yOu CoMmEnT, dUmBaSs!"

My version seems like another good corollary.

I'm probably remembering it wrong, it was a long time ago. It definitely always either won or tied but could never lose, because it knew the right responses to every move. No, it didn't cheat lol.

This reminds me of one of my very first programs, a tic-tac-toe game I wrote in high school. It displayed hardcoded grids of Xs and Os and blanks very similar to what's shown here. This approach worked because of the much more limited move possibilities. The program could always win if it made the first move, and always win or tie if the human moved first, depending on if the human made mistakes. I wish I still had the code.