I’ve never seen that, but it was my first guess as well. People here are already doing Doner-boxes with fries, meat and sauce in a takeout box, I’m assuming for people under doctor’s orders to eat a veggie-free high-grease and high-sodium diet.

Derping around on TF2 trade servers. Not even trading. Just not being in the mood for a competitive game and rather fucking around with randos.

I can tell you the two languages I would learn right now if I had the spare cycles.

1. Zig is a C-replacement language that took a no-AI stance early on. It doesn’t have compiler-assured memory safety like Rust, but it does try to revamp structures (like alloc or error handling) in a way that makes it more obvious to the programmer what is happening. I’d love to learn more, but cycles…
2. Gleam is a language that is part of the Erlang/BEAM ecosystem. It’s a functional language, so it’s a bit of a mindfuck if you come from a Python-/C-esque perspective, but if you like formal logic it might well be up your alley. It has a good web tutorial if you’re interested. Neither Gleam nor its runtime Erlang-OTP have taken a stance on AI as far as I know (Elixir has a permissive stance), but at least I’ve seen no red flags as of yet. The people at Gleam just generally give me a vibe of being deliberate and careful with their code.

Sorry for being late to the party, but I had to give my two cents on AI detectors. (specifically GPTZero & co., watermarking is different) I think it’s a bad idea to recommend them. These companies are overpromising their accuracy and essentially selling false certainty. This will also not fade over time since the inaccuracy is baked into the tech.

Currently the performance may be good for basic use cases, but recent papers seem to indicate you can still dazzle them by burning more tokens or explicitly prompting against detectors. But from what I understand about GenAI training* this is an eternal cat & mouse game, since the AI vendors don’t want their output to be detectable.

Debian dads of lemmy, join me in an approving grunt.

I don’t think it’s impossible that the underlying tech of LLMs will be evolved into something undeniably useful. But I don’t think “helping with Python” will be that.

I think on !fuck_ai I can suggest, you could also just learn the relevant bits of Python? Learning to express your thoughts in code and understanding the tools you use feels way more empowering than relying on blackbox-extruded code.

In my book socialism is about workers controlling the means of production, and historical socialists did not agree how that would work in detail.

Libertarianism on the other hand is primarily about the rejection of personal restrictions, stuff like: “I should be allowed to freely copy and share media I have legally acquired.” or “I shouldn’t be forced to pay taxes.” This individualist thinking makes it usually unable to adress structural inequality.

But he also literally has a book titled “Information Doesn’t Want to Be Free”.

That sure sounds like a zinger, but going off Wikipedia he does argue in that book for a loosening of copyright, which is pretty much what I meant. I don’t hate those positions though I’ll note they’re more libertarian than socialist. He has a whole personal freedom + monopoly control shtick, which works great for me in a lot of scenarios, but doesn’t quite work on GenAI tech.

You can call me exceptionalist, but I think LLMs stand out because the adoption of the tech basically requires very capital-intensive and thus centralized operations for model training. This makes whoever runs them (likely capital or a state) a powerful arbiter of information space, maybe best comparable with algorithmic feeds in monopolistic social media.

I think it is necessary to say: “Hey, we as a society shouldn’t run things like that. There are better ways of distributing information that work just fine.” A tech-neutral attitude can’t achieve that.

Funny horse-butt-creature notwithstanding, Dotcorows AI takes have been rather mid. Quoting from Guardian…

In this book, at least, he isn’t animated by the headline-grabbing concerns, whether existential risk or AI psychosis, deepfake porn or election disinformation, because those are unintended consequences. His target is the revenue model and the bubble it has created: “To be an effective AI critic, you need to strike at the source of AI’s power, which is the investment capital it attracts.”

He isn’t falling for AI doom and he is aware of the bubble, which puts him near the better end of the spectrum. But he’s also unwilling to fully criticize community damage resulting from LLM use. That may be because he’s fond of LLMs himself for his text editing and is repping the “it’s just another tool” defense. So he isn’t willing to go all the way when it comes to criticizing the global theft of labour that continues to power this industry. Information wants to be free, dontcha know?

Isn’t evolution beatiful? Each of these specimen has adapted to fit a highly specific niche, it’s knob optimized to predate a specific style of trouser pocket or even certain belt loops.

This is bullshit and not how pro-Israel influence in US politics works. Kirk was broadly accepted by the republican mainstream and didn’t stray too far from the party line. In fact he was for a while harrassed by Groypers in part because he refused to adopt bald-faced anti-semitism into his rethoric. This theory might well have originated in those circles.

Yes we are. Bitches (a.k.a. my wife) be thirsting for this dad bod.

Wow, no upvotes. None of you did, then? Shame, it really holds up well. And you will get my previous comment.

(DM me if you need access.)

So, who else did rewatch Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World recently?

This rational animation channel seems to focus pretty non-stop on AI-risk crank talking points. Can’t tell by skimming if they’re engaging critically, but it seems unlikely.

And now you’re apparently inspired to make a cutsiefied rendering of a slop machine running prompts, which is likened to a child being encouraged to explore.

I don’t wanna shit on the art or anything, but it seems like the general AI psyop is getting to you a little.

Just realized this is also how I feel about Element.

I work with GitLab a lot. I think it’s better for organizations than using GitHub, but my SW Engineer Spidey sense gives me death spiral vibes.

They’ve swallowed the AI Kool-Aid and are redesigning the UI to push their Chatbot on you (disabled by my org fortunately, but I still see it). They are feature creeping the fuck out of their already bloated product and are engineering features specifically to keep lots of usefull stuff behind the paid tiers, which are getting more expensive.

It’s fine for institutional use if you have sane admins, but long-term I 100% bet on Forgejo.

mailbox.org

you forgot --now

Hang on while I look up the sed command to edit your shirt off…