This is a good point. It is hard not to see this tiktok video of an unblinking man smiling at a soft focus sasquatch and think of Marconi’s first broadcast across the Atlantic. I challenge any man to look at this unsettling video of a dog astronaut and not compare it in his mind to the first integrated circuit, or alternating current.
That's not what I'm saying, I'm saying many technologies enable a slide into fascism, and not having AI until a couple years ago didn't seem to solve the problem.
I like this reasoning. If a thing doesn’t exist, and doesn’t cause a problem, then when it does exist it won’t cause a problem. Like for example people died in wars before the invention of the machine gun, therefore machine guns didn’t really kill a significant number of people.
Your point was either that the fake video of a guy doing a backflip is the same thing as the invention of the radio or that if something bad is happening, nothing that happens can make it worse. Or somehow video generation software would have solved fascism in advance by previously not existing, which is proof that it is now good.
The first two are very smart but if you were talking plainly about the outcomes of time travel paradoxes I apologize for missing that
You are geoblocking California from your AI company? That’s pretty significant. How much business did your AI company do in California before this news?
Training in a hyperbolic time chamber to max out my grasp of social cues. I emerge cocoon-like with a correct estimation of who is and is not mad at me
I love this article because “I am completely neutral on this topic, anyway totally unrelated I met a guy once and kind of thought he was a dick, here is a decade+ worth of stories and rumors about him that I’ve had catalogued and ready to go” is a genuinely hilarious format for a post. It is so catty, like the dude could’ve just wrote “fuck that Andre guy. Choke on deez nuts!” and it would have the same amount of information value about whatever is going on with Ruby.
10/10 I thoroughly enjoyed that the author saw some confusion about the structure of Ruby and thought “Time to bust out The Many Crimes of Andre.xlsx”
The Magna Carta was a second, more forceful, iteration of the Charter of Liberties introduced a century earlier in 1100 by Henry I of England.
Clauses of both are still part of the basis of English Common Law (the Common Law cited in the US Constitution) and the Magna Carta is still being cited in recent times by politicians and lawyers in support of (UK) constitutional positions, and still, albeit rarely, cited in UK courts
in 2012 the Occupy London protestors attempted to use Magna Carta in resisting their eviction from St. Paul's Churchyard by the City of London. In his judgment the Master of the Rolls gave this short shrift, noting somewhat drily that although clause 29 was considered by many the foundation of the rule of law in England, he did not consider it directly relevant to the case, and that the two other surviving clauses ironically concerned the rights of the Church and the City of London and could not help the defendants.
It's firmly a part of the continuously evolving history of UK law:
Magna Carta carries little legal weight in modern Britain, as most of its clauses have been repealed and relevant rights ensured by other statutes, but the historian James Holt remarks that the survival of the 1215 charter in national life is a "reflexion of the continuous development of English law and administration"
suggesting that what the UK lacks is the stagnation of US law which hasn't yet evolved past the errors of scale that have crept in since its foundation; the US electoral could also do with a revamp to better serve the people.
I love this website that’s full of ai-generated images and could kill somebody. I am sure that all of the emphasis on safety criticality and accuracy won’t be an issue when somebody dies because the terms of service say you need to verify every single output with a real life mycologist
What if we change our perspective? Instead of using it as a definitive identification tool, we could use it as an assistive tool. The idea is to take the data provided by the AI and compare it against the actual specimen in the field.
This would be a reasonable perspective if the application and it's author recognized it's limitations - as in _very obvious_ disclaimers to the end user that it's only intended to be assistive and not definitive.
Instead it claims to be "Safe & accurate", " Professional", "uses AI to analyze your photos and provide comprehensive safety information in seconds.", " expert level identification ", etc.
These statements provide a false sense of confidence to the lay person. An AI system based on image recognition _cannot_ definitively identify certain mushrooms. There simply is no way around that. Visuals are not a reliable species indicator for a lot of fungi, no matter how much compute you throw at it.
Where I live every fall you can find the destroying angel (Amanita phalloides) in city parks. People have died because they have confused them for other mushrooms. My part of the world doesn't have city level mushroom inspectors (that would be awesome). Maybe I'll test this tools claims that it can intact differentiate this one.
Now someone is going to point out that they do have disclaimers! This is true they do, buried much further down the page well below all their marketing bs about providing "expert level identification" (<- this one particularly bothers me as it is a flat out lie. As mentioned above visuals don't cut it. An actual human expert in the field of mycology isn't going to just look at a mushroom to ID it.). So while I'm glad they do have disclaimers somewhere it doesn't seem like the author thinks they are important enough to feature higher up.
Tldr; Sure, tools like this can be assistive. That doesn't mean their authors should be given a free pass to be deceptive and irresponsible in presenting the tools actual capabilities.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War
reply