The alternative being…? What, third party candidates? Are you kidding? The only alternative to “blue no matter who” is more “red” and as you can see, there is literally zero support from “red” whereas there’s at least a substantial fraction from “blue.”
I don’t think many people who said “blue no matter who” are actually very surprised by this, because the phrase is not coming from die hard supporters, it’s coming from anyone with basic logic skills.
People who pirate in my experience typically do so because they would never have bought the thing otherwise. Pirates are enabled by technology to have things they wouldn’t otherwise get to have. There isn’t often any “lost sale.” Only free advertisement.
Nothing is black and white. Bernie may be a geezer, but he has consistently good policy positions for his entire career, and has more integrity than the rest of the senate combined.
No, it’s obvious to anyone with a brain. If the commenter seriously thought it might have been a false positive when they read the original comment, they never would have relayed their thought the way they did in their reply, and it is so clearly a reference to the content of the post that to analyze it even that deeply is overkill. To anyone reading this who is a native English speaker: if you think that comment needs a “/s”, you need to work on your reading comprehension. Read things more carefully.
It’s not a combination of the names, it’s wordplay: “splayd” => “splay” (like splayed tines, to cover “fork”) + “spade” (a shovel, sharper than a spoon, which covers “knife” and “spoon”)
replace jobs wholesale with no oversight or understanding that need a human to curate the output
Yeah, that sucks, and it’s pretty stupid, too, because LLMs are not good replacements for humans in most respects.
we
Don’t “other” me just because I’m correcting misinformation. I’m not a fan of corporate bullshit either. Misinformation is misinformation, though. If you have a strong opinion about something, then you should know what you’re talking about. LLMs are a nuanced subject, and they are here to stay, for better or worse.
This is an increasingly bad take. If you work in an industry where LLMs are becoming very useful, you would realize that hallucinations are a minor inconvenience at best for the applications they are well suited for, and the tools are getting better by leaps and bounds, week by week.
edit: Like it or not, it’s true. I use LLMs at work, most of my colleagues do too, and none of us use the output raw. Hallucinations are not an issue when you are actively collaborating with the model and not using it to either “know things for you” or “do the work for you.” Neither of those things are what LLMs are really good at, but that’s what most laypeople use them for, so these criticisms are very obviously short-sighted to those of us who have real-world experience with them in a domain where they work well.
Your own logic can be applied in the reverse to argue for nonviolent diplomatic alternatives to war (like this) being a good thing even if they are not perfectly good or the best option.
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Or, at least, you’ve touched on something that is often overlooked and underemphasized, despite being a (if not the) root cause of this stuff. I think it’s hard for people to understand if they were not young men once, and it’s easy to forget as you age, even if you were.
You mean ammonium, jsyk