Thanks for the source.

What other states other than California has it?

Maybe denial is the new word for club?

I’m sorry, the contract has already been signed.

It would, because desktop users are a lot easier to infect than servers. They might be a lot less valuable than servers, but at the same time, they are much less secure. I’m sure there are plenty of people who would prefer going for the easier targets if there is enough of them to make up for the smaller value.

Are they? Damn.

Why 3 Doors Down?

What makes you think this doesn’t apply to Mastodon instances?

But that’s exactly how we learn stuff, as well. Artificial neural networks are modelled after how our neuron affect each other while we learn and store memories.

LLMs don’t learn because we don’t let them, not because they can’t. It would be too expensive to re-train them on every interaction.

No, because you don’t save the bullshit along with the content. Also, it is a lot more organised than saving the html.

Gamers are part of the group spreading the DEI misinformation, so yes, they can be pretty stupid.

But the comment I replied to didn’t just deny the confirmation that AI is thinking, it also denied that AI “thinks” at all. That puts him in a position of making an unproven claim. In fact, he is directly making that claim, while the article he is denying only alludes to saying that LLM “thinks” like a human. That makes his unproven claim even more egregious than the article’s.

I wasn’t calling it thinking. I’m saying people claiming it’s not is just jumping the gun. It’s also funny you’re simply claiming I am pro AI without needing any proof. This is what I meant when I said people who are anti-AI should strive to be better than the AI they criticise. Acting based on non-facts makes you no better than AI with their hallucinations.

Its also funny that you’re calling me out when I’m just mirroring what the other guy is doing to make a point. He’s acting like his is the correct opinion, yet you only calling me out because the guy is on your side of the argument. That’s simply a bad faith argument on your part.

Anybody who claims they don’t “think” before we even figure out completely how they work and even how human thoughts work are just spreading anti-AI sentiment beyond what is considered logical.

You should become a better example than an AI by only arguing based on facts rather than things you hallucinate if you want to prove your own position on this matter.

That’s another result of people not having enough money to be experimental with their movie choice. If movies are too expensive for you to go regularly, of course most people would choose those that they know are gonna be safe for them to enjoy instead of giving unknown original movies a try.

What’s ironic about me having imperfect grammar and appreciating those who corrects people politely? They both go quite well together.

It’s more ironic that you consider providing a short and concise grammar correction as being impolite but you decided that laughing at a minor grammar mistake to be acceptable for you to do.

Also, you forgot a comma before mate.

I always upvote polite correction like those.

Might be his only joy in life. Let him be, as long as he’s not too rude about it.

Anyone blindly saying a tool is ineffective for every situation that exists in the world is a tool themselves.