21–30 of 203 posts
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/artificial-cl...
it replaces terms used to exalt Artificial Intelligence to what they really mean, and some tongue in cheek jokes against things that are used to pass billionaires/tech as friendly (e.g. replacing bill gates with his actual name)
Oh the irony: "They Live", a movie famously about alienation and dehumanization, and you let AI do all the coding.
Interacting with a computer in natural language is much more human than typing in special codes and punctuation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I find funny (only not really) is the wildly different interpretations of this film people have, for many they seem to be primed by other things to see in it what they want. Basically skeptical of common forms in modernity, that is very clearly the intention. However, I have also seen that in extreme far-right communities this film represents how Jewish people control the world... somehow I don't think that is w…
It's interesting right? Now there's too much distrust of authority and also not enough. Even the word "skeptic" is sometimes used to refer to people who "do their own research" and doggedly latch on to wild conspiracy theories. Avoiding groupthink is another slightly different positive spin on (my read of) the underlying message. There's such a thing as toxic individualism too, but if there's a "bad" way to be a free…
Do you know the difference between a conspiracy "nut", and a rational person?
For a "conspiracy nut", understanding that there is sufficient incentive (also implies a lack of deterrent) for X to do Y is proof enough that X is doing Y.
For a "mainstream" person, that is not enough. They require real, solid proof to consider that X is doing Y.
Note that this is about deciding their own behavior, and not about handing capital punishment for X.
I ll let you decide who is smarter...
Oh the irony: "They Live", a movie famously about alienation and dehumanization, and you let AI do all the coding.
(Genuine question as we're all trying to figure this shit out)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's interesting right? Now there's too much distrust of authority and also not enough. Even the word "skeptic" is sometimes used to refer to people who "do their own research" and doggedly latch on to wild conspiracy theories. Avoiding groupthink is another slightly different positive spin on (my read of) the underlying message. There's such a thing as toxic individualism too, but if there's a "bad" way to be a free…
>wild conspiracy theories. Do you know the difference between a conspiracy "nut", and a rational person? For a "conspiracy nut", understanding that there is sufficient incentive (also implies a lack of deterrent) for X to do Y is proof enough that X is doing Y. For a "mainstream" person, that is not enough. They require real, solid proof to consider that X is doing Y. Note that this is about deciding their own behavi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interacting with a computer in natural language is much more human than typing in special codes and punctuation.
So telling someone to make a table for you is more human than making it yourself, because you're using natural language instead of saws and hand planes?
My personal tagline, "I came here to kick ass, build web applications, and chew bubble gum. And I'm all out of gum." came from this movie.
I came here to kick ass and deploy microservices... And I'm all out of ass.
Oh the irony: "They Live", a movie famously about alienation and dehumanization, and you let AI do all the coding.
What if it wouldn't get done otherwise? (Genuine question as we're all trying to figure this shit out)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's interesting right? Now there's too much distrust of authority and also not enough. Even the word "skeptic" is sometimes used to refer to people who "do their own research" and doggedly latch on to wild conspiracy theories. Avoiding groupthink is another slightly different positive spin on (my read of) the underlying message. There's such a thing as toxic individualism too, but if there's a "bad" way to be a free…
>wild conspiracy theories. Do you know the difference between a conspiracy "nut", and a rational person? For a "conspiracy nut", understanding that there is sufficient incentive (also implies a lack of deterrent) for X to do Y is proof enough that X is doing Y. For a "mainstream" person, that is not enough. They require real, solid proof to consider that X is doing Y. Note that this is about deciding their own behavi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's interesting right? Now there's too much distrust of authority and also not enough. Even the word "skeptic" is sometimes used to refer to people who "do their own research" and doggedly latch on to wild conspiracy theories. Avoiding groupthink is another slightly different positive spin on (my read of) the underlying message. There's such a thing as toxic individualism too, but if there's a "bad" way to be a free…
>wild conspiracy theories. Do you know the difference between a conspiracy "nut", and a rational person? For a "conspiracy nut", understanding that there is sufficient incentive (also implies a lack of deterrent) for X to do Y is proof enough that X is doing Y. For a "mainstream" person, that is not enough. They require real, solid proof to consider that X is doing Y. Note that this is about deciding their own behavi…