Ech

This isn’t TACO, it’s graft.

PatrickStar.meme - “Is Money a legal basis?”

Who censored epstein’s name? And why?

Relying on elections to oust fascists isn’t exactly a great plan.

The technical term was created to promote the misunderstanding that LLMs “think”. The “experts” want people to think LLMs are far more advanced than they actually are. You can add as many tokens to your context as you want - every model is still, fundamentally, a text generator. Humanizing it more than that is naive or deceptive, depending on how much money you have riding on the bubble.

Leapfrogged? It never left. LLMs were made to make shit up.

Except it’s not libel. It’s a one time string of text generated exclusively for him. Literally no one would have known what it said if the guy didn’t get the exact thing he wants “deleted” published online for everyone to see. Now it’ll be linked to his name forever, but the llm didn’t do that.

“All of them? All of them. All of them is good.”

He’s gonna fucking invade, isn’t he?

It’s pretty telling to focus on the dev’s right to reject inclusivity while simultaneously rejecting and deriding everyone else’s right to judge them for that.

And if it was such a useless change, why didn’t the dev reject it for that instead of saying it was “political”? He’s the one that declared the word itself, not the utility of the change, was the problem. Calling everyone else “trolls” for pointing that out is just disingenuous.

They refused to use the right pronoun. One is a mistake. The other is a choice.

Perhaps this is what you mean, but it’s even worse than just unpaid hours for current employees. His implicit goal is to generate a slave-class of people (which is what actual AI would be) that he can make more of or delete at his whim, and eliminate to livelihoods of any current employees (besides him and other execs, of course).

Ah yes, he’s the “Internet prophet”. That gives him credibility.

Because that’s what we should be accepting now? Really?

I think your deduction as to why we’re in the shape we’re in in the US is poorly formed. People didn’t just wake up one day and decide to get their news from the clown network and then they voted in a clown. People who wanted more power and control deregulated industries, moved money out of communities, worsened public education, monopolized the media, monopolized industry, and stoked fear until people wanted any change and promise of safety regardless of who gave it.

I figured I’d summarize to the more immediate issue instead of writing a treatise on the last 70 years of US society. Sorry, I guess?

As for the topic at hand, my point is that Cory isn’t a “positive educated voice” in this matter. He’s shoehorning his special interest that he’s questionably qualified at into a topic that is entirely separate. And the only reason he has a platform is because he appeals to Internet denizens with his stoking of righteous anger at corporations. That’s far from a good baseline to start with when the stakes are that much higher than a blog article.

Ultimately, my “bad opinion” that you think is so harmful is that people should listen to voices with experience on the matter. I gather from your reply that you have gripes with authority figures, but I promise you that letting pop figures dictate the discussion isn’t going to solve anything.

If a hammer suggests using a nail to cook your sandwich, do you think maybe he has a point because he knows nails, or do you consider that maybe he just knows nothing about cooking?

Also, anyone can get “published”. It means nothing.

The only new thing about this is that it’s coming from the US. Irrational governments have and do exist in the real world and people have been dealing with them for centuries. Maybe look to them for answers instead of the random internet celebrity that has zero experience in the matter.

I’m not “taking it personally”. And he’s not just someone “commenting online” - he’s advocating for the Canadian government to take specific action based on his unqualified opinion, and I’m saying it shouldn’t be given a platform just because he has name recognition. It’s not unreasonable to call that out, and acting like I’m being hysterical just to discredit me is shitty.

The content is meaningless because he isn’t qualified. Valuing enjoyment and entertainment over information from people actually well versed in the given field is exactly how you get what’s happening in the US right now. It’s an appeal to emotion rather than logic - ironically something I expect Cory would claim to be against.

Can we stop sharing this guy’s every word like he’s an authority on everything? He’s a blogger, not an expert on international relations.