Very good analogy. They’re also ignoring that getting faster and faster at reaching a 50% success rate (a totally unacceptable success rate for meaningful tasks) doesn’t imply ever achieving consistently acceptable success.

I’m confused - by Abbot do you mean Gov. Abbott of Texas, and are we talking about the same issue? Cuz the 99-1 vote was about a senate bill regarding AI. Greg Abbott can’t vote on senate bills, and there’s no senator named Abbot.

Expecting people to know about that 99-1 vote might be misplaced optimism, since it hasn’t been made into a meme yet.

Thanks, cap’n.

Instead of laws keeping up It also might turn out to be a case where culture keeps up.

Twenty years ago tracking armed thugs in ski masks would have been called a public service.

Was Ted the 1 vote or was he in Cancun for the roll call?

In other news, tech firms propose new idea for lucrative government contracts.

Accused???

Well alrighty then, I hereby accuse the operators of donaldjtrump.com of piracy! Anybody else notice any piratical activity? Foxnews.com seems pretty fishy.

Not saying it’s unreasonable to err on the side of caution in opposing anything Trump does, but the move to end birthright citizenship is aimed at the automatic citizenship granted to anyone born on US soil, and anyone born anywhere with at least one American parent. The goal is to suppress non-white voting by invalidating citizenships for people MAGA considers “foreigners”. Most Americans were born in America to American-born parents, and have nothing to worry about unless MAGA tries to redefine citizenship at the Constitution level.

I see nothing wrong with making sure people who vote are citizens, what I object to is kicking actual citizens off the voting roles because they’re not Republicans.

I see this as the 2025 equivalent of the entertainment industry’s collective backlash against Napster back in the day. The issue will probably be decided by courts and legislatures, as before, and that legal decision will be transmuted into fierce morality, as before. The major difference is that in 1999 the legal combatants were a whole industry vs a handful of software developers and basically Lawrence Lessig, whereas with AI they’re all corporations with tons of money at stake. So the outcome could easily be very different this time, and our crowdsourced moral standards could follow suit.

No dude I’m not under that impression, and I’m not going to take an quiz from you to prove I understand how LLMs work. I’m fine with you not agreeing with me.

No, I didn’t start by predicting a series of words, I already had thoughts on the subject, which existed completely outside of this thread. By the way, I’ve been working on a scenario for my D&D campaign where there’s an evil queen who rules a murky empire to the East. There’s a race of uber-intelligent ogres her mages created, who then revolted. She managed to exile the ogres to a small valley once they reached a sort of power stalemate. She made a treaty with them whereby she leaves them alone and they stay in their little valley and don’t oppose her, or aid anyone who opposes her. I figured somehow these ogres, who are generally known as “Bane Ogres” because of an offhand comment the queen once made about them being the bane of her existence - would convey information to the player characters about a key to her destruction, but because of their treaty they have to do it without actually doing it. Not sure how to work that yet. Anyway, the point of this is that the completely out-of-context information I just gave you is in no way related to what we were talking about and wasn’t inspired by constructing a series of relevant words like you’re proposing. I also enjoy designing and printing 3d objects and programming little circuit thingys called ESP32 to do home automation. I didn’t get interested in that because of this thread, and I can’t imagine how a LLM-like mental process would prompt me to tell you about it, or why I would think you would be interested in knowing anything about my hobbies. Anyway, nice talking to you. Cute theory you got there about brain function tho, I can tell you’ve know people inside out.

Wow. So when you typed that comment you were just predicting which words would be normal in this situation? Interesting delusion, but that’s not how people think. We apply reasoning processes to the situation, formulate ideas about it, and then create a series of words that express our ideas. But our ideas exist on their own, even if we never end up putting them into words or actions. That’s how organic intelligence differs from a Large Language Model.

Amen! When I say the same things this author is saying I get, “It’S NoT StAtIsTiCs! LeArN aBoUt AI bEfOrE yOu CoMmEnT, dUmBaSs!”

Will teenagers with shitty vision be able to get away with lying about their age or will there be verification?

I’ll say one thing for the No CSS philosophy - at least it eliminates light-colored text on a light-colored background using the thinnest possible font, which is probably the stupidest stylistic trend since the web began.

That’s 100% rationalization. Machines have never done anything with “inspiration”, and that’s never been a problem until now. You probably don’t insist that your food be hand-carried to you from a farm, or cooked over a fire you started by rubbing two sticks together. I think the mass reaction against AI is part of a larger pattern where people want to believe they’re crusading against evil without putting out the kind of effort it takes to fight any of the genuine evils in the world.

I see this exact mental non-process in so much social media. I think the endless firehose of memes and headlines is training people to glance at an item, spend minimal brain power processing it and forming a binary opinion, then up/downvote and scroll on. When that becomes people’s default mental process, you’ve got Idiocracy, and that’s what we’ve got. But I see no solution. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it spend more than two seconds before screaming at the water and calling it EVIL.