341–350 of 365 posts
I'm confused by both this blog post, and the reception on HN. They... didn't actually train the model. This is an announcement of a plan! They don't actually know if it'll even work. They announced that they "trained over 50 million neural networks," but not that they've trained this neural network: the other networks appear to just have been things they were doing anyway (i.e. the "Virtual Positioning Systems"). The…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the goal is to replace you with a machine and to widen the poverty gap. Also because I do not consent to it. Are you also fine with taking pictures of pretty women on the street (hey, they'd be walking there anyway) and posting them online and farming ad revenue? Or training a model on their likeness for porn?
Didn’t beloved New York Times photographer Bill Cunningham make a storied career out of doing exactly that? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/01/style/bill-cunningham-boo...
Anyway if he didn't ask them for permission then that is very gross, yes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The humor isn’t recognized because the humor isn’t there. To be funny there has to be a setup, a punchline, some kinda joke structure. Humor isn’t just saying false things… Imagine a comedian saying this on stage, how many laughs would that get? > Do people really think MyFitnessPal is trying to build a model of the average pantry? We’ve all seen dumber things that are real. Juicero is my personal favorite example.
The humor is attained afterwards when one reads the comments who take it seriously, they become the punchline. That completes the circuit. It's a nice setup.
In actuality we "didn't get it" because we extended you faith and respect as an equal participant in the conversation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The humor is attained afterwards when one reads the comments who take it seriously, they become the punchline. That completes the circuit. It's a nice setup.
You think we didn't get it because we weren't smart enough. In actuality we "didn't get it" because we extended you faith and respect as an equal participant in the conversation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The humor is attained afterwards when one reads the comments who take it seriously, they become the punchline. That completes the circuit. It's a nice setup.
Except we're living in a world where it wouldn't be that surprising, especially after reading this post. Good idea of a joke but bad execution.
This title is editorialized. The real title is: "Building a Large Geospatial Model to Achieve Spatial Intelligence" > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. My personal layman's opinion: I'm mostly surprised that they were able to do this. When I played Pokémon GO a few years back, the AR was so slow that I rarely used it. Apparently it's so popular and commo…
> the rest of the world gets a cool new technology The rest of the world gets an opportunity to purchase access to said new technology, you mean! It's not like they're releasing how they generated the models. It's much more difficult to get excited about paid-access to technology than it is about access to tech itself.
Though as a copyright reformist, I do believe that such models should be released as public domain after 14 years. Though the cloud thing does make these sort of obligations harder to enforce...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it isn't. Stop normalizing this behavior. There was no consent. You expect that you are playing a game, not working for them for free.
Of course there was consent. There is even an explicit EULA listing in plain writing that you are actually collecting data for them that people have to agree to before playing. That people suddenly wake up to the fact that they were dumb for providing labour for worthless virtual gifts doesn't magically allow them to claim it was abuse post-fact.
I'm confused by both this blog post, and the reception on HN. They... didn't actually train the model. This is an announcement of a plan! They don't actually know if it'll even work. They announced that they "trained over 50 million neural networks," but not that they've trained this neural network: the other networks appear to just have been things they were doing anyway (i.e. the "Virtual Positioning Systems"). The…
After skimming the article I don't understand what the Large Geospatial Model is supposed to be, what it can be used for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course there was consent. There is even an explicit EULA listing in plain writing that you are actually collecting data for them that people have to agree to before playing. That people suddenly wake up to the fact that they were dumb for providing labour for worthless virtual gifts doesn't magically allow them to claim it was abuse post-fact.
If people don’t read or understand the EULA, then it violates the spirit of the legislation (not to mention it’s plain shady). Consent must be voluntary (opt-in) and informed.