joe

joined 3 years ago
[–] joe@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This is something I don't think people are internalizing about (agentic) AI. Its disruption doesn't stem from its "intelligence", but in its persistence. We are very rapidly approaching an era of infinite agency, but our entire society is designed around people having limited agency. Everything assumes that a vast majority of people won't bother to use their agency. Sending complaints to local government agencies, waiting in line for concert tickets, starting an online business, submitting pull requests, etc.; they all assume most people won't bother; they'll choose to use their limited agency on something else. Agentic AI will blow that all up; you'll be able to point the AI at a goal on your behalf and not think about it again.

AI slop will hypothetically vanish as AI improves, but that doesn't do anything to address the fact that we'll all have effectively infinite agency.

[–] joe@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

No one said it was "fine".

[–] joe@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Calm down, pal. No one said that at all. If all you have is strawmen maybe sit this one out.

[–] joe@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It negates any map that was designed specifically to counteract racism, because considering racism is, by definition, taking race into account. (According to their logic)

Notably, specifically designing a district map to give a specific political party an edge is not illegal. This will be a race to the bottom and all voters should be pissed. The natural end result will be states with GOP-controlled legislature will craft maps such that only the GOP can win and Dems will have to do the same to even hope to keep the playing field level.

People all across the political spectrum will lose any chance at representation, depending on how their political leanings compare with the legislature of their state.

[–] joe@lemmy.world -5 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

That context isn't important at all, unless you're implying that the correction is wrong or misleading.

I think it's useful to bring attention to the fact that this isn't water being used by the data center for operations, but for its construction.

And let's be real, there's a ridiculous amount of misinformation surrounding co-called "AI", both pro and con. Someone providing context and clarification isn't something I'd complain about. (With the caveats above.)

 

Direct link to the game: https://www.epicfurious.com/

[–] joe@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don't understand the question.

[–] joe@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The New Coke fiasco begs to differ.

The cynic in me imagines that they switch away from real chocolate, everyone will hate it, they'll release a new product line that proclaims it uses real chocolate, but charge a premium for it, and people will buy it.

[–] joe@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

Has it occurred to you that all the searching in the world can't help you find a website that isn't indexed?

Obscure errors especially may not exist for you to find, and depending on how small and obscure the music is you're looking for, it may not exist or be properly indexed.

Search engines aren't magic.

[–] joe@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Maybe? How niche are we talking? Are you saying the websites you need to find exist but you can't find them via a search engine?

I honestly thought people didn't have issues finding things via a search engine anymore. TIL people still struggle with it.

[–] joe@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Is it really a miscalculation if a calculation was never done?

 

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that a web designer can refuse to create websites for same-sex weddings on religious grounds. The case involved a Colorado web designer named Lorie Smith, who refused to create a website for a same-sex couple's wedding. The couple filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, alleging that Smith's refusal violated their civil rights.

view more: next ›