Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
Posts 0
Comments 256
Tim Cook is “not 100 percent” sure Apple can stop AI hallucinations
  • The Turing test is flawed, because while it is supposed to test for intelligence it really just tests for a convincing fake.

    This is just conjecture, but I assume this is because the question of consciousness is not really falsifiable, so you just kind of have to draw an arbitrary line somewhere.

    Like, maybe tech gets so good that we really can't tell the difference, and only god knows it isn't really alive. But then, how would we know not to give the machine legal rights?

    For the record, ChatGPT does not pass the turing test.

  • Tim Cook is “not 100 percent” sure Apple can stop AI hallucinations
  • When games that are losses for the AI from humans are included, the bug is fixed.

    You're not grasping the fundamental problem here.

    This is like saying a calculator understands math because when you plug in the right functions, you get the right answers.

  • X is about to start hiding all likes
  • This is literally what these walled gardens depend on. Why are mocking people for it?

    Just change cities, "but my friends live here."

    Just leave the cult, "but the cult separated me from all my other friends."

    Like, yeah. Cult's do this on purpose to keep people locked in.

  • How to identify that light in the sky
  • I saw ine night a light in the sky that moved around really bizarrely. Kind of up, then back down. A little left, a little right. It was like it was wandering. And while there were stars around it that were still, this light wasn't the only wanderer. It couldn't be an orbiting satellite, so... some aircraft, then? I have no idea.

    I should really get a telescope.

  • No one should have to “grow a thicker skin”: Valorant studio commit to harsh penalties for harassment
  • Which is fine but you are speaking about distrastically changing the culture of a community

    This is incredibly defensive, dude.

    No, I don't care that these policies put people's accounts at risk. That is, in fact, the point. Extreme prejudice.

    [edit] To clarify: I'm responding to a sentiment that seems individualistic and anti-regulatory. I would much rather people disagree with content moderation policies, and not content moderation itself. That said, though, I want to agree with you that over-policing banter is bad content moderation.

    When I get flamed and I feel it's annoying I just mute the person and continue.

    If muting the person is a solution, what is the point of allowing them to flame you?

    Like, you seem to be waffling between whether they should or should not be able to yell at you over your skill or commitment. Do they get an unhindered direct line to your ears? Or do some things people say cross a line?