• 0 Posts
  • 117 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 27th, 2023

help-circle


  • Those two things aren’t being claimed by the same people.

    There are people with functioning brains, who are aware that AI is shit at programming, and there are managers who have been sold a sales pitch and believe that they can replace half of their software engineers.

    AI doesn’t actually need to be effective to cost a bunch of jobs, it just needs to have good salespeople. Those jobs will come back when the businesses which decided to rely on AI discover the hole they’ve dug for themselves. That might not be quick though, because there’s no rule saying that major businesses will have competent leaders with good foresight.





  • The reason I tend to object to these things is that bikeshedding isn’t free, it creates work and technical debt. That raises the bar for changes we ought to make, and I think it raises it quite a lot higher than objections which are frequently specific to the US and are largely imaginary (which is my honest interpretation of most of these changes).

    That said, “genocide” is clearly unnecessarily provocative. It’s also not an industry-wide change, it’s just one function, so this particular change seems sensible to me



  • Be cautious about trusting the AI-detection tools, they’re not much better than the AI they’re trying to detect, because they’re just as prone to false positives and false negatives as the agents they claim to detect.

    It’s also inherently an arms race, because if a tool exists which can easily and reliably detect AI generated content then they’d just be using that tool for their training instead of what they already use, and the AI would quickly learn to defeat it. They also wouldn’t be worrying about their training data being contaminated by the output of existing AI, Which is becoming a genuine problem right now



  • I didn’t actually downvote, but I do object to your characterisation of this as misleading. People aren’t labelling their products with the intent that the people buying it believe they’re eating meat.

    Those labels are designed to communicate what sort of thing you can do with it. If you label something “burger”, for example, everyone will understand at a glance what they’re looking at, and that you might like to put it between two buns with some lettuce. It will also catch the attention of people who are looking to make burgers, but might not have considered non-meat options.

    Also, common usage of words like “burger” aren’t limited to anything specific. People talk about “chicken burger” or “turkey burger” all the time, for example, and nobody accuses them of trying to trick people into eating chicken. Why not a “lentil burger” as well?










  • MartianSands@sh.itjust.workstoScience Memes@mander.xyzblursed
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    6 months ago

    Sure, but there are far more things which will kill the entire person at the same dose they’ll kill the cancer than things which can be carefully controlled by choosing the right dose.

    These studies which claim to kill cancer in a petri dish usually turn out to be the former, because not killing the host is the difficult part