I don’t know that the article was all that badly written, but you missed a couple of points that I’d call essential:
One, it was 32 students out of 35 total who used AI and then didn’t even bother to check it, so only 3 students even made an honest attempt in the entire semester.
Two, the professor told the students that they were allowed to contest the grade if they wanted, and only 2 out of the 32 students even tried to contest it.
For anybody who doesn’t know what a front end is, the job of the front end is generally to take data from the back end and present it to the user. So for the fediverse, a front end might be the web page or app. The back end is the actual instance where you made your user.
Lots of front ends do filtering, but at the explicit instruction of the user. It’s better to do it on the back end if you can because it’s wasteful to send data to the front end only to throw it away. But there is a place for front end filtering, just not in secret.
So in this case, a person who used tesseract as well as, say, a lemmy web page interface, would probably expect to see the same data in both places, but the tesseract front end would actually be hiding a lot of stuff.
It’s just shocking that they’d create a front end that filters out a bunch of stuff without telling the user. To me, that’s not the job of a front end client program. If they want to add additional filtering over the backend, it needs to be directed by the user or at least specifically approved by the user.
You have to look at how it was presented. Part of a speech that was supposed to be humorous, but we all know he really wants to run again.
Also, that proposed amendment is a troll in my opinion. The guy who proposed it, some representative named Andrew Ogles, knows it has no chance of being ratified. So, why would he propose it? The likely candidates in my mind are to kiss up to Trump and to “trigger the libs” or whatever, at the same time. Proposing something that will never happen just for giggles is a pretty classic troll.
I take all of my points from wisdom, and place them into intelligence!
Now, to challenge myself to build the world’s most polluting machine.
There are two reasonable ways of interpreting The Colbert Report. One is that he was joking, and this we know is what he intended, because he made himself clear when he was off the show.
The other is that he was trolling. He was throwing things out there and he was joking, but not really. You now see this style from a lot of right wing people. Trump just did it in his correspondents dinner speech where he said he was going to run again in 2028.
It’s because other people come in with their own biased perspectives and they can make some sort of reasonable interpretation that they get the wrong idea and never correct it.
People who are smart in one way are usually not smart in every way.
The guy from the article was referred to as “a US man,” so I’m assuming he has US citizenship.
The border cannot legally deny US citizens from entering the US. But they can do all sorts of other things, like detain or delay or prosecute people for not complying.
OpenAI’s general model doesn’t give out reliable medical advice. So, they need to instruct it not to give out medical advice, and instead to tell the user to consult a real doctor. Hopefully they have done that already.
But beyond that, there’s a quagmire. Some people will move mountains to avoid talking to humans about anything, or even about some certain things like their health, and if ChatGPT refuses to give advice, they’ll either find a way around the instructions to the AI, or they’ll just find another AI that is willing to give medical advice. So part of me is glad that these people will get a specialized medical advice AI model, because it’s better than nothing, and if OpenAI wants to risk the lawsuits, that’s their problem. But it’s still dangerous if their new medical advice model hallucinates like all of the current models seem to. I personally wouldn’t recommend people use it.
It’s shit that you have to know exactly what to say in order to take advantage of your rights.
But one thing I should mention is not just to be careful not to say what you’ve been eating or drinking. Never tell the cops anything about yourself other than what is legally required. They often ask where you’re coming from and where you’re going, for example.
They often try to trick people into consenting to a search by phrasing an order as a question, and pretending like they were just asking a question. “Would you mind opening your trunk?” The response is “I do not consent to searches.” I would also lock my door if I stepped out of my car. There are many situations where they can pretend you implied consent to search.
I’m reminded of how Disney pulled most of their movie ideas from the public domain, and then pushed hard to try to extend copyright so that none of their movies would ever enter the public domain themselves.
What I thought the article was going to be about, assuming it was clickbait: Tech Executives losing their jobs after losing their company’s money on AI, or Tech Executives realizing that it’s their jobs that could most easily be replaced by AI.
What the article was actually about: Literally murder threats and firebombing their houses and that sort of thing.
I have no comment beyond being surprised that the headline was literal.
Do sheep not have that thing where they jump up on stuff to get to a higher location?
I don’t know the author, but British people often say “hire” where Americans say “rent.”
Like they will say, “hire a car.”
Probably foreign countries are comparing the US and China’s foreign policies. China is going to exert economic control internationally. The US does that, too, but is also starting wars and generally strong-arming everybody because our current administration doesn’t know how to do anything else.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
If that was the proposal, then maybe the end product would have looked like these ones.
Despite the memes, apparently, Twinkies go stale pretty soon after they’re made.
How long are we to wait? If we wait too much longer, we’ll have waited for longer than the Confederate States of America existed.
I worked in software for, well, let’s say 20 years, at some elite places, too. And the one thing that I never understood was how few people ever bothered “to make sure it is correct,” as you put it, even before this new problem with AI. They didn’t even bother to make sure it was correct even when they wrote it themselves.
You don’t know how many times I’ve been sent a request to review code, and it should have only been like 20 lines of code, but instead it was page after page of irrelevant stuff, because they created the review from the wrong baseline. But they never even took a single look at it before they sent it to me.
So many people don’t write tests for their code that generally my biggest achievement at any given assignment was creating test frameworks that let them write tests using domain specific language, because it made it much easier. At a certain point, if it’s easy enough, even those people will write tests, especially if they know that I’ll be doing the review.
I honestly don’t see AI code as being all that different. People still don’t even do the minimum, but they just get exposed and embarrassed more easily.