I think you're oversimplifying and overgeneralizing. Plenty of people remained lonely back in the day, plenty of people socialize now. It's just that now they have the option to socialize through the internet.
Prior to the internet people were staying home and watching TV. The dynamic is much longer lived than you think. Check out the book 'Bowling Alone'.
Mine runs about 100mb/minute (these things don’t compress much), so make sure you consider that when buying an SD card.
You may not want to hold toooo much but I suppose you could oversize+underprovision to get some more write cycles.
Virtually all have a “save” button to avoid overwriting segments.
You’ll need some car mods if you want the to continuously record (and cutout if battery voltage gets too low). Mine at least has a tiny capacitor (or battery?) to detect movement and kick on for 15 seconds while disconnected for a few cycles.
Yeah let's be really specific. Look at the poem in the article. The poem does not mention suicide.
(I'd cut and paste it here, but it's haunting and some may find it upsetting. I know I did. As many do, I've got some personal experiences there. Friends lost, etc.)
In this tragic context it clearly alludes to suicide.
But the poem only literally mentions goodbyes, and a long sleep. It seems highly possible and highly likely to me that Gordon asked ChatGPT for a poem with those specific (innocuous on their own) elements - sleep, goodbyes, the pylon, etc.
Gordon could have simply told ChatGPT that he was dying naturally of an incurable disease and wanted help writing a poetic goodbye. Imagine (god forbid) that you were in such a situation, looking for help planning your own goodbyes and final preparations, and all the available tools prevented you from getting help because you might be lying about your incurable cancer and might be suicidal instead. And that's without even getting into the fact that assisted voluntary euthanasia is legal in quite a few countries.
My bias here is pretty clear: I don't think legally crippling LLMs is generally the right tack. But on the other hand, I am also not defending ChatGPT because we don't know his entire interaction history with it.
Speculating a cabal of authoritarians planning to change the world order is strictly in tinfoil hat territory.
It is much more boring than that. Democracy is an unstable way of ruling societies and generating value out of people. Keeping it healthy requires not only elections but lots of "undemocratic" institutions with unelected well-educated people in it (courts, agencies, foundations, bureaucrats).
Managing economics such that there aren't any too big organizations that can significantly affect individuals' independent decision making is also required. That's the antitrust laws for ya.
When educational, scientific and social organs are undermined, the public becomes more susceptible to strongman figures that provide easy solutions to the degradation. When economy is mismanaged undereducated people are easily swayed, more educated people are easily coerced.
It is statistical common human behavior to support autocrats, especially under stress. Autocrats themselves have a strong inherent understanding of power and great skills/intuition to detect the weakest. If you encoutered bullies in your life, you may have observed how their brain and the cult of personality works. It is fascinating that they can pick out the weak so easily.
Like the bullies, the autocrats understand each other since they understand themselves. Our crappy happenstance is not a result of a strategy but the systematic behavior of bullies and, bullied and oppressed people.
The Republicans pick on Venezuela and Europe and Canada since they know that those societies are weak and they are separated. They know from years of backstabbing experience that if they play the game right, they will get to enjoy one more praise, one more success, one more sadistic dopamine rush. They will get to enjoy eating one separated bison from the herd at a time.
Without attacking the system itself, it is really hard to win against it. There needs to be strong external factors for established autocratic regimes to collapse. Attackers need to be smart and nible and more importantly systematic. Moreover the lines of defense are not uniform. There are many smaller bullies even in the weak. They have lots of economic incentives to keep their small serfdoms.
My country, New Zealand, is intent on self-flagellating with carbon policy which just feels so absurd and silly when our emissions are a tiny drop is the gigantic ocean of carbon emissions from the US and China. Why should we hurt ourselves economically when we cannot possibly make a difference, while our adversaries and allies alike enrich themselves while destroying the planet?
Hallucinations are more or less a solved problem for me ever since I made a simple harness to have Codex/Claude check its work by using static typechecking.
I skipped Dolly because I honestly don't know enough about country music to know if she's a "great artist" or merely "famous over a long time". Same for the other guy: I'm just not familiar. But I called out your choice of Keanu because it's really well-known that he is not a great actor, and he probably agrees. But it's great that he made a good career for himself anyway; as I said, he does well in certain roles that fit him well. I don't consider myself the top 1% in my profession either.
Of course, I guess this could easily veer off into a discussion about what qualifies as "great artist". Does a top-selling musician/singer who has limited range or uses autotune count, or does someone with amazing technical ability but little commercial success not count? Does a "wooden" actor qualify as a "greater artist" if they've grossed higher than Daniel Day Lewis?
They were probably just envious you were rocking a Kershaw Iridium Dessert Warrior. Which also comes in at under $100. And the Iridium family are pretty nice knives.
What was the reasoning Hitler used to deport Jews and other "undesirables" to Polish concentration camps? Was it legal?
If so, maybe we shouldn't try to equate "What is legal/possible" with "what is moral/good". It can be legal and possible, and still very inhumane and evil. The Nazis prove that, don't they?
> and sending them back
We didn't "send them back". We sent them to a third place. A very bad place. Why are you ignoring that when the person you are replying to was specifically mentioning it?
> It's rhetoric like yours that encourage people like the Tyler Robinsons or that sniper who attacked the ice facility.
There is absolutely zero evidence of this. Tyler could have a very specific grievance with Charlie Kirk's rhetoric without being motivated by other people calling Trump and MAGA Nazis or Facists.
Guess I'm confused - is the ideal use case for Sprites for suspendable, iterative, sandboxed compute sessions (with disk)?.. Or is the idea that these things can also/should run production workloads in place of a traditional webserver setup? If the latter, can every sprite boot up with what's needed to instantly serve web traffic? Or would they need to build/install things internally every time a new sprite turned on? Do these horizontally scale a long lived, high trafficked application?
From my perspective, the issue is quite simple: progress optimizes everything other than the cost of human labor. Socialization, as defined today, inherently requires human labor, and thus falls under the Baumol effect.
The 'loneliness epidemic' is merely the result of weakening demand, owing to a slew of low-cost alternatives. Thus, we end up with two options,
1. automate the social experience
2. accept that the comparative cost of socialization will grow higher forever
For some reason, the vast majority of humans in the 21st century are interested in morally rejecting (1), thus ensuring (2) as an outcome.
.
Note: this is not to say I reject the notion that individuals can be helped. I think most comments in this thread are quite healthy, even as they narrowly focus on the individual case.
But it is rather impractical to adopt a positivist "how you can help" framing to address the epidemic at large. While certainly instrumentally useful, it is necessarily unlikely for the same traditional solutions to loneliness to spontaneously 'gain influence' against what has thus far been a gradual decline in their effectiveness and buying power.
Plus... Apple kinda wastes it. Not to be judgy, but we don't need 2nm chips to hardware-accelerate Netflix and Pornhub. The iPhone is locked-down, there's no worry that it will be a poor gaming platform or disrupt valuable workflows. A new iPhone chip means nothing anymore.
Between the $99/year sideloading, Liquid Glass and fighting fruitlessly against CUDA, I think Apple needs a break to reflect on why their software strategy is so unpopular with everyone. The hardware advances are doing them more harm than good at this point.
This tension is so close to a fundamental question we’re all dealing with, I think: “Who is the web for? Humans or machines?”
I think too often people fall completely on one side of this question or the other. I think it’s really complicated, and deserves a lot of nuance. I think it mostly comes down to having a right to exert control over how our data should be used, and I think most of it’s currently shaped by Section 230.
Generally speaking, platforms consider data to be owned by the platform. GDPR and CCPA/CPRA try to be the counter to that, but those are also too-crude a tool.
Let’s take an example: Reddit. Let’s say a user is asking for help and I post a solution that I’m proud of. In that act, I’m generally expecting to help the original person who asked the question, and since I’m aware that the post is public, I’m expecting it to help whoever comes next with the same question.
Now (correct me if I’m wrong, but) GDPR considers my public post to be my data. I’m allowed to request that Reddit return it to me or remove it from the website. But then with Reddit’s recent API policies, that data is also Reddit’s product. They’re selling access to it for … whatever purposes they outline in the use policy there. That’s pretty far outside what a user is thinking when they post on Reddit. And the other side of it as well — was my answer used to train a model that benefits from my writing and converts it into money for a model maker? (To name just an example).
I think ultimately, platforms have too much control, and users have too little specificity in declaring who should be allowed to use their content and for what purposes.
I mean Venezuela is a touch iffy on how strongly we commit but saying the USA basically owns Canada isn't exactly controversial maybe controls is a more acceptable way of phrasing it? They are a "sovereign" with a lowercase S at best.
Yep, to the extent that short (at best, cause they are potentially fallible) of a warrant canary getting snuffled it is very possible that a company could set up a subsidiary for appearances.
Or, just buy bits of control interest outright (CryptoAG?)
1. Hyper-perfect social media / television setting "the best" expectations for an event.
2. Decreased knowledge of how to host a gathering. It's not rocket science, but throwing one the first time can seem daunting. And throwing one well does take skill. E.g. icebreakers, identifying and facilitating the right introductions by highlighting mutual interests, making sure wallflowers have a good time, defusing tensions, food, etc.
3. Decreased American tolerance for and ability to handle awkwardness, and there's always going to be some awkwardness in social interactions.
4. Decreased public/accessible American meeting places. There used to (< 2000) be a plethora of low-cost, broadly-accessible spaces that could serve as training wheels for events (handling food, furnishings, cleaning, etc). They've essentially all been privatized, commercialized, and optimized to turn seats -- think real coffee shops disappearing in favor of Starbucks.
I think both your statement and their statement are too strong. There is no reason to think LLMs can do everything a human can do, which seems to be your implication. On the other hand, the technology is still improving, so maybe it’ll get there.
You mean the same Germany that uses its domestic access to the bargain basement cloud providers like Hetzner and Contabo to de-anonymize Tor users for international law enforcement?
Or the Germany that bought Crypto AG along with the CIA to backdoor encryption hardware?
"This is a classic ChstGPT gotcha". This and the gaslighting "Exactly, now you see why A!=B" when it was ME who pointed out his wrong A=B assumption are driving me crazy.
They f*cked it up. I am convinced ChatGPT will be a classic case of an early prodigy which gets surpassed by the better, second generation products. History is full of those. I think Tesla is another, recent one.
Prior to the internet people were staying home and watching TV. The dynamic is much longer lived than you think. Check out the book 'Bowling Alone'.