They certainly don’t mean your Amex lol

I forgor. This is the post I was referring to. It’s well-researched and quite fascinating, actually.

@0xD@infosec.pub

The big one is task (thread) isolation. Let me dig up some sources and get back to you,

It’s also objectively less secure than Chromium, which is hard to admit.

No it’s just R^7 regression! Testosterone levels will be negative by next week!

Edit: and male bodies were approximately 2000% testosterone in the 1940s!

Because Drake is from Canada

And compile-time reflection will probably also continue to suck due to some irreconcilable limitations of type-safe generic specialization. Oh how I would love an equivalent to C++ template parameter packs…

Obviously you can’t turn a person white so they probably mean the led.

This is true, but it still has to distinguish between facetious remarks and genuine commands. If you say, “Alexa, go fuck yourself,” it needs to be able to discern that it should not attempt to act on the input.

Intelligence is a spectrum, not a binary classification. It is roughly proportional to the complexity of the task and the accuracy with which the solution completes the task correctly. It is difficult to quantify these metrics with respect to the task of useful language generation, but at the very least we can say that the complexity is remarkable. It also feels prudent to point out that humans do not know why they do what they do unless they consciously decide to record their decision-making process and act according to the result. In other words, when given the prompt “solve x^2-1=0 for x”, I can instinctively answer “x = {+1, -1}”, but I cannot tell you why I answered this way, as I did not use the quadratic formula in my head. Any attempt to explain my decision process later would be no more than an educated guess, susceptible to similar false justifications and hallucinations that GPT experiences. I haven’t watched it yet, but I think this video may explain what I mean.

Edit: this is the video I was thinking of, from CGP Grey.

I still don’t follow your logic. You say that GPT has no ability to problem solve, yet it clearly has the ability to solve problems? Of course it isn’t infallible, but neither is anything else with the ability to solve problems. Can you explain what you mean here in a little more detail.

One of the most difficult problems that AI attempts to solve in the Alexa pipeline is, “What is the desired intent of the received command?” To give an example of the purpose of this question, as well as how Alexa may fail to answer it correctly: I have a smart bulb in a fixture, and I gave it a human name. When I say,” “Alexa, make Mr. Smith white,” one of two things will happen, depending on the current context (probably including previous commands, tone, etc.):

1. It will change the color of the smart bulb to white
2. It will refuse to answer, assuming that I’m asking it to make a person named Josh… white.

It’s an amusing situation, but also a necessary one: there will always exist contexts in which always selecting one response over the other would be incorrect.

Legal money transfers are not a use case. Crypto is simply much more expensive to maintain. All these mining rigs and all that electricity must be paid for.

Various currencies are moving away from the proof-of-work model, FWIW. Ethereum was mentioned in this comment chain as one of them.

I’m… agreeing with you…

Did it? Friendly reminder to all that the French Revolution was a failure.

Proprietary on the server/distribution end

Zoinks!

Why do people hate snap over flatpak? I feel like I’ve read a thread or two about it, but I haven’t seen an answer that was particularly satisfying (almost definitely for a lack of trying on my part, to be clear).

No, I’m just saying that compatibility databases do seem to exist, and the existence of “custom” ones implies that there is a built-in one. It wouldn’t be surprising to find out that Barbie and about a million other widespread legacy executables are in there.

I’m not gonna pick a side here as I don’t wanna fan the flames, but I will say that I have a good deal of bones to pick with police oversight systems (or lack thereof).

However, this got me thinking: would you say the same thing about restaurant servers? By becoming a server in the U.S., are you not perpetuating a tipping paradigm that has systematically denied the working class billions of dollars of wages that un-tipped employees are entitled to? It’s fairly clear that a “good server” cannot fix the system by participating in it, and given that a server makes the same amount of money as a cop—if not more—it isn’t really fair to say that one group “needs” the job while the other does not.

It’s a curious predicament.

Well, I did find this.

I love how often this is referenced around here

Easily top 3 features of Lemmy

Let me preface this by admitting that I’m not a camera expert. That being said, some of the claims made in this article don’t make sense to me.

A sensor effectively measures the sum of the light that hits each photosite over a period of time. Assuming a correct signal gain (ISO) is applied, this in effect becomes the arithmetic mean of the light that hits each photosite.

When you split each photosite into four, you have more options. If you simply take the average of the four photosites, the result should in theory be equivalent to the original sensor. However, you could also exploit certain known characteristics of the image as well as the noise to produce an arguably better image, such as by discarding outlier samples or by using a weighted average based on some expectation of the pixel value.

Well, that may be for the best. Good “space games” are really hard to make for a variety of obvious reasons, so publishers should be really picky about the ones they greenlight.