Isn't bulletproof glass woke? Should just have more guns there. Then everyone would be too afraid to shoot him
emmy67
0 Post – 27 Comments
Joined 1 months ago
Mr Maduro accused the opposition of producing fake evidence to contest the result of the election and said the US was behind what he described as a farce and a coup attempt.
Wouldn't be the first time
It would be hard to have been worse than Trump. But that's hardly an endorsement when a literal rock would have done better.
The idea stems from the propaganda tool that would be if it were state owned. Other countries would seriously discourage or ban its use, but as it is useful they'd need a replacement. Hence a thousand shitty ones.
That's not in anyone's interest. It's the surest way to have a thousand national search engines which are all shitty. National walled internet Gardens etc
Break it up instead
We are all travelling through time right now with very little impact.
Yes I know, I suck.
How is it not currently a propaganda tool? It's owned by shareholders like blackrock and vanguard. At least with it being nationalized it's possible to control it democratically
It is somewhat, but it's not as bad as if it was run by Trump and co.
Which is how x would become the whole internet.
Which is why the best option. Which you didn't include, is splitting Google up. Split the advertising from search. This is the surest way to make them cater to us. Especially if we can force them to compete with other search engines.
Or, the words "i don't know" would work
That hasn't been the case if you look into what happened with Microsoft and browsers.
The other thing is
everyone would still use Google.
Is actually wrong, and what they proved with the antitrust case itself. A huge chunk of the anticompetitive activity was Google paying to be the default because people don't change the default.
I honestly agree. The moment she won the primary i knew it was lost.
Funny thing is, that the part of the brain used for talking makes things up on the fly as well 😁 there is great video from Joe about this topic, where he shows experiments done to people where the two brain sides were split.
Having watched the video. I can confidently say you're wrong about this and so is Joe. If you want an explanation though let me know.
One real reason to boycott them is that they aren't trans friendly.
The fundamental problem is all those results are on people with abnormal brain function. Because of the corpus calusotomy.
It can't be assumed things work that way in a normal brain.
People do make up things in regards to themselves often. Especially in the case of dissonance. But that's in relation to themselves, not the things they know. Most people, if you asked what op did will either admit they don't know or that you should look it up. The more specific the question the less likely to make something up.
I wasn't the one attempting to prove that. Though I think it's definitive.
You were attempting to prove it could generate things not in its data set and i have disproved your theory.
To me, the takeaway here is that you can take a shitty 2 minute photoshop doodle and by feeding it thru AI it'll improve the quality of it by orders of magnitude.
To me, the takeaway is that you know less about ai than you claim. Much less. Cause we have actual instances and many where csam is in the training data. Don't believe me?
But you do know because corn dogs as depicted in the picture do not exists so there couldn't have been photos of them in the training data, yet it was still able to create one when asked.
Yeah, except photoshop and artists exist. And a quick google image search will find them. 🙄
Generative AI, just like a human, doesn't rely on having seen an exact example of every possible image or concept
If a human has never seen a dog before, they don't know what it is or what it looks like.
If it's the same as a human, it won't be able to draw one.
A dumb argument. Corn and dog were. But that's not a corn dog like what we expect when we think corn dog.
Hence it can't get what we know a corn dog is.
You have proved the point for us since it didn't generate a corn dog.
Given the popularity and successes of NASA, the USPS, NOAA, etc, I think you are being overly pessimistic.
None of those things are direct propaganda tools.
The second they start having to put maga posters into you mailbox and nobody else's you'll see it differently.
I think what we're running into here, is that you want to talk about removing capitalism. Which I'm all for, in the context of a functional democracy. Which isn't the case in the US or anywhere in the world.
Until we know what that looks like, and its parameters you won't admit how bad nationalising a search engine is without other privately owned alternatives.
Are you stupid? Something has to be in the training model for any generation to be possible. This is just a new way to revitalise kids
To you they aren't, but to the right wing they are.
I'll need some sources on that one.
We are already at risk of that. I don't see what your point is.
Then this conversation is pointless if you won't acknowledge the risk of it
It didn't generate what we expect and know a corn dog is.
Hence it missed because it doesn't know what a "corn dog" is
You have proven the point that it couldn't generate csam without some being present in the training data
Also if you'd like to see how the corn dog comment is absurd and wrong. Go look up my comment.
Then if your question is "how many Photograph of a hybrid creature that is a cross between corn and a dog were in the training data?"
I'd honestly say, i don't know.
And if you're honest, you'll say the same.
Sure thing bud. Sure thing 🙄
No, I am telling you csam images can't be generated by an algorithm that hasn't trained on csam
Wild for a company that's never made a profit