To all the people in here saying “I could warn them and help them prepare to take on the conquistadores” while the sentiment is good, the conquistadores weren’t the ones that wiped them out, it was smallpox and other diseases. So unless you can synthesize a vaccine, or just expose them to it then so they can recover population in a couple centuries, they’re doomed no matter what.
A heads up is not gonna save them from their real killers, smallpox, unless you brought it with you and give them a couple centuries to recover population and gain immunity.
That’d be great if freedom of movement wasn’t one of the first rights they take away to prevent something like this.
How is this argument different than the “video games cause violence” argument?
It keeps you on there site. Same reason Twitter banned links and has grok now, the longer you stay on the site the more likely you are to look at or even click on an ad on that site. If you google something, then quickly scroll past the first couple ad links and click on the first non ad link you are maybe only staying on Google for 1 or 2 seconds. If you get an “ai overview” at the top and start reading through that then you’re maybe spending 10-30 seconds reading through that. That’s another 10 seconds that the ad was displayed that Google can go to there ad customers and say people were looking at it longer.
Another reason more motivated by user experience is also that the AI has a better “understanding” of meaning compared to typical search algorithms. Say you search “Starbucks price at closing” when you meant “Starbucks stock price at time of market closing” an AI would be more able to discern that meaning as opposed to a traditional algorithm which may show you the closing time of the nearest Starbucks, or the price of one of there drinks etc.
That may be true for small or mid size startups that are reliant on VC money, but we’re talking about Google and Microsoft here, they already have there money printers going and don’t need VC money.
They had just as much control with the old search algorithm, though. They could still pick and choose what you see on the search results with their opaque algorithm. The only difference would be that instead of only showing some regime captured media outlet they could generate there own narrative on the fly, but it’s not like there’s a shortage of sycophantic media written by actual people they could pull from.
It is a word but it’d be more common to use the word beauty or attractiveness in that context, or “based off looks”. People would understand what you mean either way though.
Christianity spread first in Europe, and in general, by offering the toiling classes something to look forward to besides suffering. For a bit charlemagne tried to spread it at the tip of a sword but that was more the exception then the rule.
It spread through the America’s partly through violent colonization but also for the above reasons and the natives desire to assimilate into the new ruling class.
It spread and continues to spread through sub saharan Africa mostly due to heavy evangelical prosthelyzation from the west. By the time of African colonization the Europeans were directing there violence towards securing resources, not securing converts, even though that was the excuse they often gave.
Christianity may not be true but it is an attractive world view. Yes you may suffer the cruelty of others on earth but that is temporary, at the end of it all you will spend eternity in paradise and your torturers will be sent to hell. There’s a reason Marx called it the opiates of the masses, and the promises of opium don’t need to be true to sell.
They have a word, you just can’t say it
This is lemmy, people hate China, America and commercial social media. Not a big fan of any of those three either so yeah, fuck em. Would be better if we banned all commercial social media but I’m not gonna cry over only some of them getting banned.
Listened to a podcast with a person who lived in the ussr when it fell and was comparing it to current day America. Basically they were saying that people are becoming more cynical and don’t really believe in the project any more and are waiting for something to come along and fundamentally change things.
With gorbachev it was a turn to democratic liberal capitalism, with trump its a turn to autocratic neo-mercantalism.
Both could bring down the great empires of the twentieth century.
And then we exported “sakkaa” to Japan, but don’t worry Japan we won’t abandon you like the English and hop on the “football” bandwagon.
Another very surprising outcome of the research is the discovery that these LLMs do not, as is widely assumed, operate by merely predicting the next word. By tracing how Claude generated rhyming couplets, Anthropic found that it chose the rhyming word at the end of verses first, then filled in the rest of the line.
If the llm already knows the full sentence it’s going to output from the first word it “guesses” I wonder if you could short circuit it and say just give the full sentence instead of doing a cycle for each word of the sentence, could maybe cut down on llm energy costs.
I think a lot of services are doing this behind the scenes already. Otherwise chatgpt would be getting basic arithmetic wrong a lot more considering the methods the article has shown it’s using.
How long it lasted?
Between '94 and '98, after they mandated the background checks but before they had the infrastructure to do instant background checks.
Background checks started in '68, they didn’t become instant until like '93 because internet but they still existed
They may have existed and some states imposed them but they weren’t required federally until the Brady bill in '93 .
there’s never been national waiting periods.
There was a 5 day waiting period required nationally between when the Brady bill was first enacted in '93 and when the national instant criminal background check system came online in '98
X is years of experience , y is a combined axis, technical knowledge for the green line and salary for the red line
Implying that the Democrats are now “the party of big business” is arguably true (and very boring)
While true in some scenarios, in anti-trust Lina khan’s ftc has done significantly more than trump ever did. Biden keeping her over the protest of countless business execs and daily articles in the wall street journal on how she’s ruining America shows some commitment to prosecuting big tech.
Meanwhile, trump’s anti-trust moves were mostly based off petty issues he had with the ceos or the platforms having a “liberal bias”. Now that every big tech ceo has fallen in line and given him $1 million for his inauguration I doubt we’ll see much movement on that front.
I learned about it because Richard stallman gave a speech at my campus (pre-controversy) and half his speech was the gnu copy pasta unironically. Which I get, if i made core software that most of the world’s server runs on, I wouldn’t shut up about it either.