snooggums

Things that are inspiration or for approximations. Layout examples, possible correlations between data sets that need coincidence to be filtered out, estimating time lines, and basically anything that is close enough for a human to take the output and then do something with it.

For example, if you put in a list of ingredients it can spit out recipes that may or may not be what you want, but it can be an inspiration. Taking the output and cooking without any review and consideration would be risky.

Sometimes it is a bunch of Indian guys pretending to be AI!

Bit chat

Bitch at

Being Jack Dorsey, I’m going with the latter.

No search engine or AI will be great with vague descriptions of niche subjects because by definition niche subjects are too uncommon to have a common pattern of ‘close enough’.

• narrowing down keywords for an unfamiliar topic
• getting a quick intro to an unfamiliar topic
• looking up facts you’re having trouble remembering (i.e. you’ll know it when you see it)

I used to be able to use Google and other search engines to do these things before they went to shit in the pursuit of AI integration.

LLMs are like a multitool, they can do lots of easy things mostly fine as long as it is not complicated and doesn’t need to be exactly right. But they are being promoted as a whole toolkit as if they are able to be used to do the same work as effectively as a hammer, power drill, table saw, vise, and wrench.

Yeah, morons who believe anything wealthy people say. Just like Musk.

Trump has always been a petty shithead loser. He was mocked back in the 80s for being creepy around women, running failed businesses, and not paying his contractors.

I don’t think Musk or Trump have any charisma, but apparently a lot of people see (inherited) wealth as charisma.

Data centers have become a major economic development battleground for many states, even though they provide relatively few jobs and consume massive amounts of resources.

Business welfare state!

This means, too, that Tesla hasn’t hit the milestone Musk promised back in January, when he told investors that the company would launch “unsupervised full self-driving as a paid service in Austin in June … no one in the car.”

Back in 2015 he claimed fully autonomous driving would be available in 3 years (by 2018) and since then it was always a year or two away. Why does anyone believe anything he says?

“From a technology standpoint, Tesla will have a car that can do full autonomy in about three years, maybe a bit sooner.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_autonomous_Tesla_vehicles_by_Elon_Musk

Since CPU speeds are still doubling every 18 months you have a solid point!

Or maybe not since you are probably referring to the doubling of transistors that was an observation which was accurate over a lengthy period of time in the context of when the observation was made. Nobody said that would continue indefinitely either.

“Guess I’ll just drive off the road then!”

If it happens to someone multiple times and they treat lane assist as a crutch then they are not safe to drive on the road.

The best part is they followed up with this gem so I know they didn’t pull over like you did:

For sure, but when you are driving cross-country you sometimes do not have a choice because there is nowhere to stop.

Reported and reviewed are the same word so your math checks out.

Driving when tired enough to drift out of your lane multiple times?

You shouldn’t have a license.

And the people who knowingly put profits before lives would be individually serve time for manslaughter.

So we can mock it!

All that power used for a fucking coin flip.

This is like measuring the increasing speeds of cars in the early years and extrapolating that they would be supersonic by now by ignoring the exponential impact that air resistance has.