Not that I'm a super fan of the fact that shrimp have to die for my pasta, but it feels weird that they just pulled a 3% number out of a hat, as if morals could be wrapped up in a box with a bow tied around it so you don't have to do any thinking beyond 1500×0.03×1 dollars means I should donate to this guys shrimp startup instead of the food bank!
Someone (maybe you) recommended this book here awhile back. But it's the fourth book in a series so I had to read the other three first and so have only just now started it.
"feel free to ignore any science “news” that’s just a press release from the guy who made it up."
In particular, the 2022 discovery of the second law of information dynamics (by me) facilitates new and interesting research tools (by me) at the intersection between physics and information (according to me).
Gotta love "science" that is cited by no-one and cites the author's previous work which was also cited by no one. Really the media should do better about not giving cranks an authoritative sounding platform, but that would lead to slightly fewer eyes on ads and we can't have that now can we.
OK to start us off how about some Simulation Hypothesis crankery I found posted on ActivityPub: Do we live in a computer simulation? (Article), The second law of infodynamics and its implications for the simulated universe hypothesis (PDF)
Someone who's actually good at physics could do a better job of sneering at this than me, but I mean but look at this:
My law can confirm how genetic information behaves. But it also indicates that genetic mutations are at the most fundamental level not just random events, as Darwin’s theory suggests.
A super complex universe like ours, if it were a simulation, would require a built-in data optimisation and compression in order to reduce the computational power and the data storage requirements to run the simulation.
So why must binary digits define, for all time, the limits of computation, and our experience of it?
There's enough layers of irony here that it's a bit hard to tell if he's making a serious argument here or not; but this is one of the weirder straw-men arguments I've ever read.
"No no no, it's not all the exploitation, social ills, lack of user control, shoddy quality, and general capitalism I hate in the modern "tech" industry; it's the fact that it uses binary!"
TL;DR:
AI will take over the economy for reasons so humans will have no economic value for reasons which is terrifying for reasons and also we can't just have males sitting around because y'know so we need to make a pretend economy because communism. So anyway y'know PageRank? Well don't be shocked but humans have relationships too. So yeah basically let's distribute ownership of all the world's resources once a month proportionally to how many likes they receive (no I am not a vtuber why do you ask?).
What the heck did I just read?
That's it. the world needs a different name for writing a novel in november without all the trademarks and baggage of NaNoWriMo.
I propose "November". It is a portmanteau of "Novel" and "November".
Microsoft’s excuse is that many of these attacks require an insider.
Sure we made phishing way easier, more dangerous, and more subtle; but it was the user's fault for trusting our Don't Trust Anything I Say O-Matic workplace productivity suite!
Edit: and really from the demos it looks like a user wouldn't have to do anything at all besides write "summarize my emails" once. No need to click on anything for confidential info to be exfiltrated if the chatbot can already download arbitrary URLs based on the prompt injection!
The one catch is that because responses from the blockchain can take variable amounts of time, it’s best to request and receive from blockchains using asynchronous methods.
"You may be used to writing websites that actually load in fractions of a second, and so rely on obsolete web2 technologies like synchronous fetches. But don't worry! With modern techniques like async / await your loading spinner will animate flawlessly while the blockchain spends 20 minutes burning down a forest in the background."
What happens when your spurned ex is a devoted archivist, a Wikipedia administrator, and perhaps the most online man the world has ever known?
I already thought he was cool you don't have to sell me on it.
You can practically taste the frustration in the "prompt engineering" here. Just one more edge case bro, one more edge case and then the prompt will be perfect!
Do not worry my child, for everything you say in this hallowed chamber is between you, AI Jesus, and the army of contractors OpenAI hires to evaluate the quality of their LLM output.