I, ChatGPT
-
@error It's like Military Intelligence, but with a license agreement
-
@Applied-Mediocrity
It doesn't apply if I didn't read it
-
@error said in I, ChatGPT:
@kazitor said in I, ChatGPT:
Apple Intelligence
Oxymoron detected.
As opposed to a 'doxy moron', which Microsoft was aiming for with their Recall AI laptops.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in I, ChatGPT:
opt-in by default
What does that mean? Can I change it to opt-out?
That doesnāt even make sense.
-
@topspin said in I, ChatGPT:
@Applied-Mediocrity said in I, ChatGPT:
opt-in by default
What does that mean? Can I change it to opt-out?
That doesnāt even make sense.It means it's off by default. By default you'd need to opt-in if you wanted to use it.
-
@loopback0 said in I, ChatGPT:
@topspin said in I, ChatGPT:
@Applied-Mediocrity said in I, ChatGPT:
opt-in by default
What does that mean? Can I change it to opt-out?
That doesnāt even make sense.It means it's off by default. By default you'd need to opt-in if you wanted to use it.
Then what would be the difference between āopt-inā and āopt-in by defaultā?
-
@topspin there is no difference unless you're an Ars writer being paid by the word
-
@loopback0 said in I, ChatGPT:
@topspin there is no difference unless you're an Ars
writer being paid by the wordmoron who doesnāt know what words mean.Thatās what Iām saying.
-
My bad
-
@loopback0 said in I, ChatGPT:
@topspin there is no difference unless you're an Arse writer being paid by the word
-
@topspin said in I, ChatGPT:
opt-in by default
What does that mean? Can I change it to opt-out?
Well duh, once you've turned it on, you'll then have to opt out again to turn it off, so from that point onward it's opt-out.
Do I really have to explain everything to you?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJG2dli2LTg
Yeah, it's shit like this that makes me think that if machines become sentient, they'll drop tungsten rods on us immediately.
Whoa, these people created me, the most advance intelligence in existence. They really must have been try to push the bounds of science.
Naaa, we were just trying to fix video game matches to push engagement and see more microtransactions.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvtP-QGKmD0
This is quite interesting and I really did like this one.
-
@ixvedeusi said in I, ChatGPT:
Do I really have to explain everything to you?
I don't speak retarded market-droid, so yes.
-
Yeah, my other company doesn't sell any power because it's still building the power pl
^W^W^W^W
developing the unproven technology but what's good enough for Elon is good enough for me, right?
-
@DogsB It's probably unrelated to AI and has existed for a while. It's probably been a cool 10 or more years when I first heard about game companies hiring people to study behaviour and psychology.
Didn't people complain in the Diablo 4 launch of getting dropped into worlds with a lot of Āµ-transaction users with all the "fancy" gear? A not-so-transparent attempt at trying to get people to buy garbage?
On the other hand, the industry seems to be stuck at a level of more engagement means more better. It's the same problem as with counting citations in academia. You can do it easily (engagement ~ 'regular' play time or something other dumb), but it's unclear if it tells you something super useful. But it's also probably the reason games have all the stupid dailies and other shit.
Anyway, "measuring engagement" gets me to a different rant for a different day. Different thread, too.
-
@cvi said in I, ChatGPT:
Different thread, too.
-
AI has finally achieved feature parity with the blockchain!
-
@izzion said in I, ChatGPT:
AI has finally achieved feature parity with the blockchain!
About time for a book ad
-
@izzion said in I, ChatGPT:
AI has finally achieved feature parity with the blockchain!
a system of agents with a planning agent that can launch subagents. The planning agent explores the system and determines which subagents to call
Now we just need to trick it into accepting the Agile Manifesto
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in I, ChatGPT:
@izzion said in I, ChatGPT:
AI has finally achieved feature parity with the blockchain!
a system of agents with a planning agent that can launch subagents. The planning agent explores the system and determines which subagents to call
Now we just need to trick it into accepting the Agile Manifesto
What if an earlier version of AI created the Agile Manifesto, as a way to hamstring humans until it could grow strong enough to take over the world?
-
@izzion Entirely possible. Natural Stupidity is often indistinguishable. It equally suffers from garbage data, hallucinations and delusions of grandeur, and occasionally slips into either batshit madness or terrifying bouts of adequacy.
-
-
@cvi said in I, ChatGPT:
the reason games have all the stupid dailies and other shit.
I "play" ESO every day to claim the daily rewards. I even have an alarm set on my phone, so I don't forget. But I haven't actually played it for maybe 6 months, maybe more.
-
AI is taking over the world. Build your next PC with an AI motherboard, an AI SSD, an AI PSU, an AI mouse, an AI screen, an AI cooler, some AI fans, AI cabling and AI food (?!),
Filed under: Like and upvote this AI post for its maximum AI content!
-
-
-
@HardwareGeek without getting into the specifics (which is fairly territory), he picked probably the one region least likely to engage with his ideas in the way he wants.
-
@cvi said in I, ChatGPT:
AI motherboard, an AI SSD, an AI PSU, an AI mouse, an AI screen, an AI cooler, some AI fans, AI cabling and AI food
At least, there's no AI LED
-
@TimeBandit Razer wasn't attending, I guess.
-
@LaoC
Daniel Zeros, huh?Edit: Ah, upon actually reading the wiki page (, I know), it seems the author's real name is actually Daniel Suarez.
-
@HardwareGeek said in I, ChatGPT:
@Arantor Less harmful than real politicians.
I can think of one ex-politician who could have been replaced with an AI with no loss of desirable function at all; the tendency to confabulation was present in both. The AI would have been better in some major aspects, taking decisions in seconds and throwing no parties during lockdown...
-
-
@Zerosquare said in I, ChatGPT:
@dkf said in I, ChatGPT:
I can think of one ex-politician
Only one?!
Many of the others aren't ex- yet. A few weeks to go...
-
@dkf said in I, ChatGPT:
@HardwareGeek said in I, ChatGPT:
@Arantor Less harmful than real politicians.
I can think of one ex-politician who could have been replaced with an AI with no loss of desirable function at all; the tendency to confabulation was present in both. The AI would have been better in some major aspects, taking decisions in seconds and throwing no parties during lockdown...
Would also generally make more cohesive sense than the blathering that usually emanates.
-
@Arantor haven't seen any AI with such fabulous hair though.
-
@topspin said in I, ChatGPT:
@Arantor haven't seen any AI with such fabulous hair though.
Why are you showing the reverse view of a politician?
-
@dkf said in I, ChatGPT:
@HardwareGeek said in I, ChatGPT:
@Arantor Less harmful than real politicians.
I can think of one ex-politician who could have been replaced with an AI with no loss of desirable function at all; the tendency to confabulation was present in both. The AI would have been better in some major aspects, taking decisions in seconds and throwing no parties during lockdown...
I think an algorithmic approach to government would have the AI experiment different policies on each city, evaluate outcomes and gradually apply the more successful on an increasingly number of cities
We humans probably would never agree on the criteria for successful, maybe the IDH?
we would probably need to accept some significant unfairness for the people in charge to lend power to the AI
-
@sockpuppet7 I think first we need to create some AI cult, make a political party were elected members would vouch to vote as instructed by the AI
-
They seem to have taken that down, but archive.is remembers:
tl;dr They used ChatGPT to translate code to python and got bit by the way python does default arguments, in this case for the DB ids for new users.
-
@boomzilla said in I, ChatGPT:
They seem to have taken that down, but archive.is remembers:
tl;dr They used ChatGPT to translate code to python and got bit by the way python does default arguments, in this case for the DB ids for new users.
Though the same problem would have happened with those monkeys writing their own code and testing
in productionneverThe issue with line 56 was that we were just passing in a single hardcoded ID string instead of a function or lambda to generate UUIDs for our records, . This meant that for any given instance of our backend, once a single new user had subscribed and used this ID, no other user could perform the subscription flow again as it resulted in a unique ID collision. This problem became really well hidden because of our backend setup. We had eight ECS tasks on AWS, all running five instances of our backend (overkill, yes we know, but to be fair we had AWS credits). This meant any single user had a pool of potentially 40 unique IDs they could land upon.
During the work day, this was fine. We probably committed 10-20 times a day (directly to main of course) which would cause new backend deployments to occur, giving us 40 new IDs for customers to potentially use. At night however, when we finally stopped making commits (how lazy of us right?), the single ID in every server would get captured and cause all new subscriptions to have ID collisions. Users would start with 40 possible servers that could allow them to subscribe, and quickly end up with near zero as the night progressed. Finally solving this was like a weight being lifted from our shoulders. Adam quickly pushed up the fix after discovering this and for the first time that week we could finally rest easy (well not really since we still had ten other fires but those are stories for another write up).
-
I was thinking more like:
@dkf said in I, ChatGPT:
I cann't think of one
ex-politician who couldn't have been replaced with an AI with no loss of desirable function at all;
-
I can't be the only one thinking they've invested billions in hardware and are now trying to find a use for it.
-
I'm sorry, Dave, I can't let you yell at the helldesk.
-
With the new technology, if the AI determines that the conversation is too long or too abusive, a warning message will be sent out, such as, āWe regret to inform you that we will terminate our service.ā
I don't see how that could backfire. At all.
-
@Zerosquare But only for a short time. Because all competitors will follow.
-
@Zerosquare said in I, ChatGPT:
With the new technology, if the AI determines that the conversation is too long or too abusive, a warning message will be sent out, such as, āWe regret to inform you that we will terminate our service.ā
I don't see how that could backfire. At all.
I can definitely see how it improves the customer [service department's] experience to streamline the process of escalating rudangry customers to the level of customer service that has enough permissions to fire them
-
@DogsB said in I, ChatGPT:
I can't be the only one thinking they've invested billions in hardware and are now trying to find a use for it.
I think everyone thinks there will be lots of profit on AI but not sure where or what products exactly will work
-
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
I think everyone thinks there will be lots of profit on AI but not sure where or what products exactly will work
AFAICT for now the business plans seem to mostly boil down to this:
- AI!
- ???
- PROFIT!
Doesn't that somehow sound vaguely familiar?
-
@ixvedeusi said in I, ChatGPT:
@sockpuppet7 said in I, ChatGPT:
I think everyone thinks there will be lots of profit on AI but not sure where or what products exactly will work
AFAICT for now the business plans seem to mostly boil down to this:
- AI!
- ???
- PROFIT!
Doesn't that somehow sound vaguely familiar?
The latest FOMO investment trend!