admin

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

Yeah, I don't think they would have been fired if they had just held a vigil without shitting all over their employers brands.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's easy to nitpick all the details in the video, but keep in mind that 2 years ago generative AI videos consisted mostly of shape shifting mosaics that vaguely resembled the things they were supposed to be. And now we're down to "in this frame the 10x10 pixel airplane has a third wing".

That doesn't excuse the use of copyrighted material to get to this point, mind you. But to claim that this tech is going nowhere is just a contextless circlejerk.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Saw a great video about this (project is still ongoing).

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (4 children)

It's one thing to claim that the current machine learning approach won't lead to AGI, which I can get behind. But this article claims AGI is impossible simply because there are not enough physical resources in the world? That's a stretch.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It's "funny", because without that injection from Google, Mozilla would surely die. And the only reason Google hasn't stopped doing that is because then Chrome (Blink) would be more likely to be treated as a monopoly.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

Yay, mob justice!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

That's a a bit too absolute way to look at it.

From their point of view the goal isn't to abolish human involvement, but to minimise the cost. So if they can do the job at the same quality with a quarter of the personnel through AI assistance for less cost, obviously they're gonna do that.

At the same time, just because humans having crappy jobs is the current way we solve the problem of people getting money, doesn't mean we should keep on doing that. Basic income would be a much nicer solution for that, for example. Try to think a bit less conservatively.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I'm not sure how long ago that was, but LLM context sizes have grown exponentially in the past year, from 4k tokens to over a hundred k. That doesn't necessarily affect the quality of the output, although you can't expect it to summarize what it can't hold on memory.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Gotcha. That sucks.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

So those calls are not for the benefit of US companies?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (8 children)

Eh. Gen-x here. I still have an hour long phonecall over signal with my best friend over signal two times a week or so.

In my teens I wasn't too happy about making phonecalls either, but working on a helpdesk for a while sure cured that.

On the other hand, I live in a country with consumer protection, so robocalls are not a thing. And I'd strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger (and GDPR) those companies who attempt to poison and destroy my personal attention.

 

In a blog post released on Monday, VP of Privacy Sandbox Anthony Chavez said that Google is “proposing an updated approach that elevates user choice” by allowing users to select whether or not they want to enable cookies on Chrome and adjust that choice “at any time.”

“Instead of deprecating third-party cookies, we would introduce a new experience in Chrome that lets people make an informed choice that applies across their web browsing,” Chavez wrote.

view more: next ›