hoshikarakitaridia @ hoshikarakitaridia @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

580

Joined

2 yr. ago

Sry to be that guy but there's currently basically no way for him to get in jail by saying bad things.

Speech is never enough to prove insurrection or similar charges and the supreme court ruling on presidential immunity makes hard to get in trouble, even if there's actions to prove he's inciting something.

I made course for 11th and 12th graders together with a friend when I at university. It was only one week long and the topic was neural networks (we hit the timing right, it was 3 years before the AI hype started).

I did that experiment where you give the students 5 random places and amount of time out of a week. You say that is the movement profile of a fictional person and the students have to find out why those places matter.

Makes them learn the importance of information and how linking data can be an insane tool for understanding as something. But it also teaches how easy it is to gather information from small data points and self aware you should be about your digital footprint.

This.

In my experience 95% of crimes committed on a digital platform are crimes of social manipulation.

Impersonation, phishing, scams, ... It's all just a social game.

Yeah AI as a dev is shit, but AI as a more thoughtful auto-complete is actually pretty great.

To me it looks like AIs currently are right at the boundary between being a tool and being a companion. But to be a full companion, they can't be up against the boundary, they need to be well established and tried and tested as a companion to be used repeatedly, so we're still a few decades out from that from what I can tell.

No man's sky is not really the fitting example you think it anymore. Over time the devs put in some work.

Yeah I'm pretty sure the changes he praises have made me not play this game in about 3 years.

And running game studios as a business sound wrong to me. Yes, you need to make money, but it's a creative branch and as soon as you make a pipeline for how you make your games, people will get bored of it, see Ubisoft.

Maybe they had big issues with monetization but what he's talking about doesn't sound healthy at all for the developers and artists working there.

Also I'm still a bit salty that I paid for destiny2 and then they made it free and introduced DLCs. Such a slap in the face.

I know this is a bit late, but copilot is only ok if used for code completion. I switched to the free tier of supermaven a month ago and it's been way more helpful, as it can handle context better. Probably cuts coding in half and takes away a third of debugging.

Asking chatgpt for code has also become better, but imo still not reliable enough to regularly use. Just had some docker code written and it got it wrong 3 times so I gave up on that.

I get your point, AI can only save time if you know exactly what you're doing and it will only be helpful sometimes. But when it is, it's such a time saver.

• nothing. I have autism. There's nothing wrong with me, but I'm obviously a little bit different like other people, which in itself is neither good nor bad.
• because we need a descriptor and that's just what my friends use; we know what we mean with it and what we don't.

Also I'm gonna take those questions at face value, but I'm just gonna note the first question is a bit out out of left field, as no one implied that something's wrong with that.

But I don't wanna assume you are an asshole, so I'm gonna take it as a misunderstanding.

Let's go through examples:

"He's retarded" - that's a slur, unless it's ironic.

"That was retarded" - not a slur, cause it's kinda taking a dig at an action, not a person.

"I'm retarded" - technically a slur but almost always used with a hint of irony, therefore usually not a slur.

That's how I use the word with my friends. And I have autism, so technically 100 years ago I would have been the resident retard ;)

Funnily enough, I think Jesse and James both had their own episodes where they split from team rocket and somehow become very reasonable.

I loved those because it made the plot a little bit more nuanced and interesting.

Yeah I'm just trying to raise this take every once in a while in the hopes of making systematic progress on this issue at some point ^^

That's very well put

True

Probably because in the training dataset all racer povs have both hands on steering wheel so it doesn't know how it looks when they are holding something.

At least that's my guess.

While I don't think emulation is a bad way in every case, in most cases it's a huge risk and probably only helpful to a very small degree. This stuff can get very complex and I'm neither a scientist studying psychology nor a therapist, and for that matter I think those are the people that should brain storm a proper way to treat those people.

And we can start by calling them what they are in the first place. Sick in the brain. Mentally ill. And then we can start treating them properly.

And if they still commit crimes, then we can all say we tried our best and we prioritize our short term safety again over long term reduction and they will go to prison for (at least) a while.

But yeah, finding a better systematic way to prevent sexual crimes should be our priority over the satisfaction of identifying and shaming people with bad thoughts.

Yes it would. If I knew someone is thinking about murder and someone else is doing the murder, and I could choose, I would definitely take the one thinking about murder.

Now it would be great if no one was thinking about murder in the first place but the world is complex, and because we are able to choose to some degree, let's do that instead of saying "IDC, both is bad, I'll take any of them".

History shows us pedophiles exist. Some have thoughts, some commit crimes.

If we imprison all of them, that just means people will never tell you about it and they resort more to repression and crimes. But if we only imprison the ones who act on it, we open the rest of them up to the possibility that everyone accepts they won't "go away" and we could focus on making sure they don't act on it.

And there's potential: a combination of different therapies helping them learn to live with it in a safe way could go a long way.

If we help them, we help us.

But if we criminalize their thoughts, they will resort to crime, because that's all they know.

Yeah I mean ratings are giving you an idea of whether there's a chance you like that game. The higher the rating, the higher the chance. But there's always a bit of chance involved.

I tend to buy highly rated games much more often, but if I really am hyped for a game with an OK rating, I still might give it a go. You never know if it will hit your specific niche.

everyone has at least 20 minutes [...] every day.

No.

A lot of people do, but a lot of people don't.

They may have months without any time surplus. And then maybe some months where they do have a significant time surplus.

But never assume everyone has the same time to dedicate to things.

My mom is currently working 50h weeks and I'm sure that's on the lower end for some people. I'd prefer her to focus on not getting burnout so she is able to survive a bit longer, and that means she physically can't.

The potatoes?

I'm always torn about this.

If you have those thoughts and act on it, it's a crime and it's awful. But if you don't, why should we penalize you? Shouldn't we encourage people with those thoughts not to act on it?

It's a really dark topic, but I really wish we could properly discuss it. And if we consider how many people seem to have those thoughts, we should find a better way than to hunt them. Because to them it's just a "damned if you do, danned if you don't" and that's probably gonna encourage more crimes.

Unfortunately considering how bipartisan all conversations are and how hard it is to discuss those topics, it's gonna be awhile until we can really take a shot at improving our processes when it comes to that.