snooggums

Yeah, people are frequently terrible at understanding context so it shouldn’t be surprising that a computer has difficulty too.

There are actually a lot of specialized applications of neural network based computing being used for science, but they don’t get the flashy headlines because they are a tool. Those projects use it to find things to focus on narrowing down what people should look into first for confirmation, like ancient settlement patterns, stars that might have planets, and other things where patterns exist but are hard to see.

Some examples are listed here at a high level. In all cases the ai leads to humans confirming and then working from there, it isn’t the end result on its own. https://medium.com/@jeyadev_needhi/uncovering-the-past-how-ai-is-transforming-archaeology-38ded420896d

It is hard because they chose to make it hard by trying to do far too many things at the same time and sell it as a complete product.

Yes, the tradeoff between constrained randomization and accurately vomiting back the information it was fed is going to be difficult as long as it it designed to be interacted with as if it was a human who can know the difference.

It could be handled by having clearly defined ways of conveying whether the user wants factual or randomized output, but that would shatter the veneer of being intelligent.

This is because AI is not aware of context due to not being intelligent.

What is called creative is really just randomization within the constraints of the design. That reduces accuracy, because of the randomization. If the ‘creativity’ is reduced, it becomes more accurate because it is no longer adding changes.

Using words like creativity, self sabotage, hallucinations, etc. all make it seem like AI is far more advanced than it actually is.

It is not technically entrapment because they aren’t police, but they are cosplaying as cops so the label gets the point across.

What we see in this article appears to abandon that sort of rigor to manufacture more opportunities to confront someone.

Aka entrapment.

Somebody should tell society their laws need to catch up with that decision!

Said the shitty autocomplete pretending to be a doctor.

I knew the south was backwards, didn’t know they were upside down too.

I didn’t say anything about extrrninating religion, I responded to your comment saying people’s beliefs have no affect on an atheist.

Atheists being against religion is a reaction to the default assumption that everyone is part of a religion. The label atheist only exists as a response to beliefs.

Like every large religion, a significant portion of the followers will ignore any teaching in the right contexts. Christians are about turning the other cheek and loving thy neighbor except for the crusades and witch trials, Islam is the religion of peace except for when it isn’t, and Buddhism has its own exceptions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence

As found in other religious traditions, Buddhism has an extensive history of violence dating back to its inception.

These remarks followed the 1973 student-led uprising, as well as the creation of a Thai parliament and the spread of communism in neighboring East Asian countries. The fear of communism shaking the social forms of Thailand felt a very real threat to Kittivuddho, who expressed his nationalist tendencies in his defense of militant actions. He justified his argument by dehumanizing the Communists and leftists that he opposed. In the interview with Caturat he affirmed that this would not be the killing of people, but rather the killing of monsters/devils. He similarly asserted that while killing of people is prohibited and thus de-meritorious in Buddhist teachings, doing so for the “greater good” will garner greater merit than the act of killing will cost.

Other people’s beliefs directly impact me constantly through laws justified by religious doctrine, social pressures, imposing themselves into government offices, and being used to promote lying politicians who claim to be members but never following the teachings while gaining votes for being on the same team.

It has negatively affected me my entire life, even if it isn’t a obvious as racism and misogyny.

Study confirms that a randomizer creates a lot of random stuff quickly, notes some of the limitations include whether the random stuff is actually going to be useful.