blurg

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

Another place to start: Privacy Guides has a history of tracking quite a variety of computer networking tools (browsers, data providers, Internet services, software, hardware, desktop and phone, even operating systems),

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago

One of the greatest advantages of the totalitarian elites of the twenties and thirties was to turn any statement of fact into a question of motive. -- Hannah Arendt

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

Desktops, tablets, phones: Kiwix can use a bunch of reference works downloaded to your machine(s), from Wiktionary to the 100 GB Wikipedia (with thumbnail pics) to Gutenberg books.

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

might

That word is carrying a mighty big load.

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

What's one that doesn't suck?

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

Historical background on current events: Heather Cox Richardson.

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

Yeah, lots of opinions, a few facts: one of the discussions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Or as Dijkstra puts it: “asking whether a machine can think is as dumb as asking if a submarine can swim”.

Alan Turing puts it similarly, the question is nonsense. However, if you define "machine" and "thinking", and redefine the question to mean: is machine thinking differentiable from human thinking; you can answer affirmatively, theoretically (rough paraphrasing). Though the current evidence suggests otherwise (e.g. AI learning from other AI drifts toward nonsense).

For more, see: Computing Machinery and Intelligence, and Turing's original paper (which goes into the Imitation Game).

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yet use AI (possibly) to determine users' AI answers.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Used to know someone who looked for cars around a restaurant, or long lines waiting to get into a tiny cafe, asked wait staff for interesting places they liked to go; went into non-chain stores where locals shopped (off the main streets); asked walkers and service station workers for directions. Always had wild stories about what happened, if you could get past their private nature. Weird fucker, unpredictable, never could get used to'm. Likeable enough, though.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 6 months ago (6 children)

Let's extend this thought experiment a little. Consider just forum posts; the numbers will be somewhat similar for articles and other writings, as well as photos and videos.

A bot creates how many more posts than a human? Being (ridiculously) conservative, we'll say 10x more.

On day one: 10 humans are posting (for simplicity's sake) 10 times a day, totaling 100 posts. Bot is posting 100 a day. For a total of 200 human and bot posts; 50% of which are the bot.

In your (extended) example, at the end of a year: 10 humans are still posting 100 times a day. The 10 bots are posting a total of 1000 times a day. Bots are at 90%, humans 10%.

This statistic can lead you to think human participation in the Internet is difficult to find.

Returning to reality, consider how inhuman AI bots are, with each probably able to outpost humans by millions or billions of times under millions of aliases each. If you find search engines, articles, forums, reviews, and such are bonkers now, just wait a few years. Predicting general chaotic nonsense for the Internet is a rational conclusion, with very few islands of humanity. Unless bots are stopped.

Right now though, bots are increasing.

view more: next ›