I understand. I mean, I appreciate that you acknowledged the discrepancy and rescinded.

thanks for owning up to the error. appreciated.

I’m confused. You are now agreeing that you wanted to see how much. But then why did you say this:

I knew from the title that Grokipedia would be garbage.

Why do we need to know how much it stinks?

Well, the sidebar says this:

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype

It seems to me like making a post exploring just how bad exactly grokipedia is should fit here? Am I mistaken? What is even the point of this community if this is not a good fit?

Sure. But my point is, If a human wrote this, I’d say it’s a poor editing choice to include this information on an article about an athlete. Perhaps if she had a publicly-documented stroke then this could be relevant (albeit still quite speculative). But it’s not even relevant.

If you already knew what your opinion was going to be, why did you bother to click?

in fairness, I would say Conservapedia is even worse than Grokipedia. I can barely read any random paragraph of Conservapedia without wanting to destroy my internet connection. Grokipedia at least has lucid sections, an opiate to mask the hideousness.

This state of affairs is not especially surprising – if it were the popular belief that violence is justified to change society in some particular way, then society would already be changed in that way. Just like how no stock on the market can be widely seen as undervalued.

This is why class consciousness is important.

Personally, I have P(AGI within 10 years) around 15%. I think anyone who is saying definitely no or definitely yes to AGI within this time frame is vastly overconfident in their understanding of the technology, one way or the other. Or they vastly underestimate the utility of bullshit. Of course, I also have P(doom|AGI) probably around 40-70%.

I’m sure OOP works for big AI. /s

You sound like the people in my chemistry class who say things like “don’t describe subatomic particles as happy when they’re in low-energy states.”

It’s true, I fear AGI, not the current state of AI if it were to remain frozen and not improve at all. I am also not terribly afraid of climate change if the climate were to remain fixed at this point. Sure, we have lots of forest fires, and people are dying of heat, but it could get much worse.

I think maybe the root of our disagreement is that we’re appraising the current state of AI differently. I’m looking at AI now vs AI five years ago and seeing an orders-of-magnitude increase in how powerful it is – still not as good as a human, but no longer negligible – but you’re looking at both of these and rounding them to zero, calling it snake oil. Perhaps, in the Gartner hype cycle, you’re in the trough of disillusionment?

I don’t want to be a shill for big AI here, but I reject the idea that AI in its current state is useless (though I would agree it’s overhyped and probably detrimental to society overall). It’s capable of doing a lot of trivial labour that previously was not automatable, including coding tasks and graphics, and while it can’t do it with great reliability, or anywhere near as well as a human expert, and it’s much worse in some areas than others (AI-written news articles are much worse than useless, for instance), it’s still turning out to be a productivity benefit (read: reduction in jobs) for those who know how to use it to its strengths. I think the “snake oil” aspect is when lay-people are using it expecting it to be reliable or as good as a human – which is basically how big tech is pitching it.

I think we’re looking at this from completely different angles if you are "hope"ful that AI will improve.

Also, you’re looking at AI completely wrong if you’re analyzing its performance on traditional CS problems in terms of time complexity. Nobody credible is hoping that AI is going to be solving NP problems just by feeding the problem into its context window like a quarter into a vending machine.

I don’t think it’s ready to put anyone out of a job. But if you’re not worried about AI, then why bother being in the fuck-AI community? Like, why agitate about AI at all if you think it’s all snake oil.

Cute but this wouldn’t work for this obvious reason – conservatives would be like, “sure buddy. If you say so.”

OTOH, we made the rainbow work so… I guess?

God’s rainbow has 7 colors (ROY G BIV), the LGBT rainbow has 6. Guy doesn’t even know rainbows.

I know, I know. I appreciate your response. But it’s just an anecdote, not really a broad answer IMO.

It doesn’t surprise me that someone (a) on lemmy and (b) in the Linux community would respond with this comment though. But the number of people on lemmy is only a few digits.

It does matter – when I think “Desktop Market Share,” I’m already excluding the type of windows devices you just mentioned.

I guess I dislike this post because Zionists usually phrase Israeli’s actions in terms of self-defense. So to people who are already anti-zionist, this post is interpretable; but to pro-zionists, it is at best nonsensical or at worst hateful. Either way – it’s polarizing.

Just seems like the way we should be not using social media.

Who is using Linux, though? Like, 6% (or 11.3% as others have pointed out) means tens or hundreds of millions of people. But where are they?

How do we know these numbers indicate real people?