• 0 Posts
  • 67 Comments
Joined 2 年前
Cake day: 2023年7月7日
  • Techognito@lemmy.world
    toLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world•Philosophy momentEnglish
    3·
    2 个月前

    I probably should have worded myself better.

    I agree that “Admin” agrees with the intent behind the policy. What I meant is that they don’t seem to agree 100% with the wording of the policy, especially the parts that seem to be problematic for using devices for educational purposes.

    Carrier pigeon, not banned under this, however it is probably banned under some please dont bring pets to school provision.

    "Admin"s wording for this was weird (at least from the view of this non-American), “No animals allowed”, like happens when wild animals walk around? Where I live, nothing much would happen, they’ld exist, they would get commented on depending on what animal it is, and the day would continue. It almost sounds like someone would get punished if a random animal walks within school perimeter.

  • Techognito@lemmy.world
    toFuck AI@lemmy.world•Comparison of Skills (Edit by DeadTickInFreezer)English
    3·
    3 个月前

    I see you point, but I also disagree, but I also somewhat agree.

    “AI” as it is today, is a cancer.

    However, generative algorithms could have its place as tools for different purposes.

    For interactive entertainment. In things like video games, where you get to actually talk with an NPC in a role playing sense (in a speech to text and then get a response in a text to speech fashion).

    Or, as a way to generate concepts to help illustrate a point. I draw worse than most kindergarten children, and could not draw a concept of what I’m trying to explain if my life depended on it. And while I could try and explain the same thing over and over until the person gets it, I find a picture generator able to understand me quicker/better and then able to generate a picture for those I’m speaking with.

    But there are many problems with “AI” today, one of which is that it’s not actually “Artificial Intelligence”. It uses a ridiculous amount of energy, to do statistical calculations on a massive scale. Just so that in can output something that has a “high” probability of being coherent and that also answers the question/prompt (with higher focus on the former, rather than the latter).

    There is also the fact that the data it was “trained” on, in most cases are stolen and in a way that causes/caused disruption to services providing the data they steal (or in Metas case, where the logic is: “We didn’t share the stolen data, so it’s not theft”). And, while I have do have my own not so popular views on copyright, I still see it as stealing.

    tl;dr “AI” is a fucking cancer, but the genre of technology might have potential

  • Techognito@lemmy.world
    toPolitical Memes@lemmy.world•Who's counting?
    175·
    1 年前

    My bad, I didn’t write specific enough.

    Gaza health ministry changed how they classify unidentified vs identified bodies.

    But my point was that NYT didn’t do what the onion article title says they did. I am not trying to defend NYT in their ignorance when writing their title, I just wanted to know how the onion title was related?