The majority of the current ‘democrat’ party in the US are Neoliberals. Yeah it’s a right wing ideology, that’s the whole point of recognizing that even the ‘left wing’ here are still primarily conservatives.

If there’s a decent dribble there I’ll grab a paper towel or napkin and clean it off first, but I usually don’t worry about it. Wiping it off with a finger is disgusting though IMO. Her finger has about a thousand times more nasty stuff than anything in the sauce bottle, that’s a great way to contaminate an entire container.

Are you seriously complaining about requiring a signature? Why should weed paraphernalia be treated any differently to tobacco?

Obviously, most of Mega’s traffic is piracy, they have no interest in doing that. The point is it’s an actual comparison instead of the nonsense you brought up.

Of course no individual site is going to singlehandedly stop criminal acts. Glad you agree it would be exactly as effective as I suggested.

I mean, I know Google has been shitty lately, but Wikipedia isn’t hard to find: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_(penology)

I’d wager Nintendo has put some fear into a few folks considering developing emulators, but that’s the only comparison to be made here. The lack of any real consequences for individuals downloading roms is why so many are happy to publicly proclaim their piracy.

Now, I bet if megaupload added an AI that checked users uploads for copyrighted titles and gave everyone trying to upload them a warning about possible jail time, we’d see a hell of a lot less roms and movies on mega.

But having that tracking shown to you has a very powerful psychological effect.

It’s pretty well established that increasing penalties for crimes does next to nothing to prevent those crimes. But what does reduce crime rates is showing how people were caught for crimes, making people believe that they are less likely to ‘get away with it’.

Being confronted with your own searches is an immediate reminder that the searcher is doing something illegal, and that they are not doing so unnoticed. That’s wildly different than abstractly knowing that you’re probably being tracked somewhere by somebody among billions of other people.

They’re interrelated, and important to talk about together in this context. Sometimes it’s more useful to look at what the asker is trying to accomplish than simply answering exactly what was asked.

This is nostalgia talking. In the OG trilogy, Thrawn was killed in a painfully obvious coup that any competent commander should have seen coming for miles. His constant dismissal of the Noghiri was idiotic. He may not have known Leia was Vader’s daughter, but something was obviously happening with their society that he just waved away like nothing.

In Ahsoka, he has next to nothing to work with, uses his meager resources efficiently, and achieves his only goal completely (aside from Ezra’s infiltration anyway). Babylon’s betrayal is the only reason the heroes achieve anything at all. At the end of the day, Thrawn has always been a fun character who primarily looks like a genius compared to the complete idiocy of other imperials.

Holy fuck what a stupid response.

Here’s some recommended reading, hope it helps: https://kids.kiddle.co/Hypothesis

One published paper is never sufficient to claim anything as fact. To suggest otherwise is purely ignorance.

That is absolutely antithetical to the scientific process. Nothing is considered ‘fact’ until rigorously proven. This is interesting evidence that absolutely warrants criticism.

“Most of the time, when people ask me a question, it’s the wrong question and they just didn’t know to ask a different question instead.”

“I’ve tried asking ChatGPT “How do I get the relative path from a string that might be either an absolute URI or a relative path?” It spat out 15 lines of code for doing it manually. I ain’t gonna throw that maintenance burden into my codebase. So I clarified: “I want a library that does this in a single line.” And it found one.”

You see the irony right? I genuinely can’t fathom your intent when telling this story, but it is an absolutely stellar example.

You can’t give a good answer when people don’t ask the right questions. ChatGPT answers are only as good as the prompts. As far as being a “plagiarizing, shameless bullshitter of a monkey paw” I still don’t think it’s all that different from the results you get from people. If you ask a coworker the same question you asked chatGPT, you’re probably going to get a line copied from a Google search that may or may not work.

How is that structurally different from how a human answers a question? We repeat an answer we “know” if possible, assemble something from fragments of knowledge if not, and just make something up from basically nothing if needed. The main difference I see is a small degree of self reflection, the ability to estimate how ‘good or bad’ the answer likely is, and frankly plenty of humans are terrible at that too.

Future generations won’t forgive us for a whole lot of very good reasons.

Why on earth would you expect people here to defend stupid ass laws in the US? We have more reason than anyone to fucking hate them, but that doesn’t make your nonsense any less of a pointless strawman and a waste of time to respond too. Enjoy the five minutes you sucked out of life with this absolute waste of bits.

It’s only a ‘fair analogy’ if you’re comparing two things you own. You make videos for Tiktok. They own that content, not you.

You completely missed my point obviously. I’m trying to get you to consider what “intelligence” actually means. Is intelligence the ability to learn? Make decisions? Have feelings? Outside of humans, what else possesses your definition of intelligence? Parrots? Mice? Spiders?

I’m not comparing LLMs to human complexity, nor do I particularly give a shit about them in my daily life. I’m just trying to get you to actually examine your definition of intelligence, as you seem to use something specific that most of our society doesn’t.

I would argue that humans also frequently give bad advice and incorrect information. We regurgitate the information we read, and we’re notoriously bad at recognizing false and misleading info.

More important to keep in mind is that the vast, vast majority of intelligence in our world is much dumber than people. If you’re expecting greater than human intelligence as your baseline, you’re going to have a wildly different definition than the rest of the world.

That definition would also apply to teaching a baby to walk.

My experience has been the opposite. The boomers think it’s gonna do everything for them, and the young people I know think it’s gonna destroy the world.