Removed by mod

A bunch of scientific papers are probably better data than a bunch of Reddit posts and it’s still not good enough.

Consider the task we’re asking the AI to do. If you want a human to be able to correctly answer questions across a wide array of scientific fields you can’t just hand them all the science papers and expect them to be able to understand it. Even if we restrict it to a single narrow field of research we expect that person to have a insane levels of education. We’re talking 12 years of primary education, 4 years as an undergraduate and 4 more years doing their PhD, and that’s at the low end. During all that time the human is constantly ingesting data through their senses and they’re getting constant training in the form of feedback.

All the scientific papers in the world don’t even come close to an education like that, when it comes to data quality.

Haha. Not specifically.

It’s more a comment on how hard it is to separate truth from fiction. Adding glue to pizza is obviously dumb to any normal human. Sometimes the obviously dumb answer is actually the correct one though. Semmelweis’s contemporaries lambasted him for his stupid and obviously nonsensical claims about doctors contaminating pregnant women with “cadaveric particles” after performing autopsies.

Those were experts in the field and they were unable to guess the correctness of the claim. Why would we expect normal people or AIs to do better?

There may be a time when we can reasonably have such an expectation. I don’t think it will happen before we can give AIs training that’s as good as, or better, than what we give the most educated humans. Reading all of Reddit, doesn’t even come close to that.

That’s my point. Some of them wouldn’t even go through the trouble of making sure that it’s non-toxic glue.

There are humans out there who ate laundry pods because the internet told them to.

They could have left out, “for LGBTQ+ people” and it would have been just as accurate.

This is why actual AI researchers are so concerned about data quality.

Modern AIs need a ton of data and it needs to be good data. That really shouldn’t surprise anyone.

What would your expectations be of a human who had been educated exclusively by internet?

Hidden? That’s literally the main argument when anyone surfaces a complaint about Biden. It’s always some variation of, “If we let Trump into the White House again our democracy is over.”

The hangup isn’t awareness, it’s acceptance. People aren’t questioning that he’d try to be dictator for life, they doubt his ability to succeed. Once you’ve seen someone try something and fail it’s reasonable to think they’re just too incompetent to succeed.

Whenever I see people ask for support for the claim they’re typically met with a hail of downvotes and name calling. That may feel righteous but it does absolutely nothing to recruit that person. Instead they’ll walk away with even stronger convictions.

It’s true. Hamas is posting rookie numbers. They’ve got to up their death count by around 10x before they can be in Israel’s league.

There is no single reason. It’s the sum of many reasons. They’re too many to list exhaustively but when we see a concrete example the vast majority of people come to the same conclusion on creepy vs appropriate.

When there isn’t a clear line, trying to define one is misleading. You can always find some couple somewhere on earth with an arbitrarily large age gap where people will agree that it’s the result of informed consent. People then try to make the argument that this justifies all relationships with that age gap even though most relationships don’t have whatever extenuating circumstances made the one example palatable.

Large age gaps are creepy. Whenever someone has to ask if a particular age gap is also creepy the answer is almost always, “Yes.”

There’s not much to discuss. The vast majority of the time it’s creepy grooming and we all know it. It’s technically legal and there may be cases when it’s genuinely a case of consent and mutual attraction but those are the exceptions.

Attempts to find the exact line are futile. “Half your age plus seven” is a rule of thumb, not a clear border.

The girls themselves are mostly “all for it” when it’s people roughly their age. There are exceptions but most girls that age see 30+ year olds as lame old dudes. Most 30+ year olds aren’t going after high school girls either. That’s why we all cringed at David Woodson’s line in “Dazed and Confused”.

The people who don’t want them to “exert this right” are the responsible parents, friends and community who know that a 30+ year old dating a teenager is creepy AF.

The few people who actually support this are mostly rationalizing.

TIL about John Wolf.

At the time, it never would have occurred to me that each one was different or that there was beatboxing involved.

I think you have a fundamentally different view than I do on the characters. That’s clearly true :)

Even when the characters behave reasonably I always felt that they were motivated more by the potential for public embarrassment than by moral concern.

It’s hard for me to think of George as a fundamentally nice. This is the guy who shoved children and elderly out of the way when he saw smoke, goaded an alcoholic into relapsing because he felt left out, constantly lied to get advantage in situations and even tried to kill a guy out of jealousy.

That’s exactly my point. None of the characters in these shows are role models. We can sympathize with the Bundy’s or their neighbors but the show makes it obvious that nobody wants to emulate them. We can understand why Walther White did the things he does even if it’s clear that he shouldn’t have. The gang in Philly is all about showing us the worst possible decision in any given situation.

Seinfeld, on the other hand, celebrates their behavior. It canonizes our intrusive thoughts as though they were a more authentic form of expression.

Sorry. I wasn’t paying attention to the timestamps.

I honestly never understood the attraction to Seinfeld.

There were a few good jokes in there but the whole show was about them being assholes and proud of it.

They’re selfish, judgemental and entitled. They’re constantly mocking and bullying other people and each other. The final episode even lays it out explicitly.

Shows like “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia”, “Married… With Children” or “Breaking Bad” have various unsavory characters but we’re invited to reject these flaws or at least identify with them as flaws.

Seinfeld is shameless about being an asshole and pretends the rest of us are just too dumb to understand his genius.

They’ve already started shooting into Rafah. That was the safe zone they told everyone to go to.

What push or shove are we waiting for? The start of the full scale invasion? The conclusion of a full scale invasion? Is there some number of civilians deaths that would be too much?

Thank you! I can finally fill the void that vibeless OSes have left in my soul.

All joking aside, it does raise a good point.

There are many things that can be objectively analyzed and it might not be a good idea to choose them based off of vibes. When you’re designing those things it’s still a good idea to take vibes into account because people will ignore all that and put googly eyes on their 3-D printer.

What support did he provide to the protests?

I may just be to cynical at this point but I don’t trust that at all. It’s just a pause.

Biden has structured that block as a “Type 2” decision. It creates the illusion of standing up to Israel but it allows him to instantly and unilaterally completely reverse it as soon as public attention has shifted.

Given history, I expect that’s exactly what will happen. Once the IDF murders enough people in Rafah, they’ll be “done”. Then they can pretend that they’ve turned over a new leaf and definitely won’t do any more genocide. Biden will congratulate them and resume all the weapons shipments, including sending the stuff that’s currently being held back.

Short of restructuring this as a “Type 1” decision, there’s little reason to think this is anything beyond theatrics.