![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ca/pictrs/image/7b0211f0-7266-4e13-9d26-8c3e6126af62.png)
That’s just how numbers work. Those aren’t exponential increases, they are proportional. 30% will always be 30%.
There’s no benefit to sensationalizing the math.
That’s just how numbers work. Those aren’t exponential increases, they are proportional. 30% will always be 30%.
There’s no benefit to sensationalizing the math.
This assumes that there is a general level of benevolence and altruism in tech companies. There might be some, but probably not enough.
I should say that I absolutely would love if your idea (or credit to the original creator) actually happen. It would be fantastic and I would much prefer that world to what I think we’re going to get.
I think my original two questions still stand:
Does journalism/arts/scientific publishing produce enough content and varied enough content to be sufficient to training the models? I doubt it because let’s say there are 500,000,000 (500M) authors/creators that could be supported by their efforts. That’s a small number compared to several billion people posting on social media, blogs, forums, etc. They also post on a much more broad set of topics. If the tech companies were benevolent and did pay for content, how many more authors and creators could they create? Let’s say they double it, that’s another 500M people (we’ll assume that many more people are even available for these professions). They all need salaries let’s say they each make 60000/year. That’s 30 trillion in expenses/salaries. Even playing with the numbers some, half the people, half the salary and the number is still in the trillions. And that’s probably still not enough content and isn’t even close to the output of several billion people. I think the actual solution would be to partner with social media companies (like they already are) to find ways of inticing more participation to get additional data, but even that probably isn’t enough if we believe the original study
Why partner with newspapers, scientific journals, whatever for likely pretty high fees? Currently, they can subscribe to all the journals, newspapers, etc for probably less than a million/year. That’s cheap for them, they probably already did it. They are probably paying reddit more than that alone. Right now, Facebook is probably negotiating on their treasure trove to get Zuckerberg his next billion dollar bonus.
Overall, I don’t think they are interested in quality data, I think they just want more. Pretty soon they will have consumed everything ever produced (that’s in a format that can be digested) and humanity it’s entirety will not be able to produce data fast enough. At that point, they will probably start producing their own content and asking humans what is valuable and what is not. By 2040, your favorite author may be a machine and the NY best sellers may be a way to determine which AI content is good enough to train the next Gen on.
Nice idea, but does all journalism combined supply enough data (and varied data) to meet the needs for training the models? Also, why pay a special rate when only a few subscriptions would be required and most of the rest is free?
This is kind of the opposite of that idea though. This is saying that not everything put on the screen needs to be computed from the game engine. Some of the content on the screen can be inferred from a predictive model. What remains to be seen is if that requires less computing power from the GPU.
Can you renovate your current home to get another bedroom and maybe some more common space?
You could probably get a 2nd mortgage for a project like that but if you aren’t familiar with them then you should speak to a financial advisor (one that has a fiduciary duty to you). This may allow you to keep your existing mortgage and rate on the first loan and only pay the higher rate on the 2nd.
It is a loosing battle to try to make sense of the nonsensical. Only use their craziness as a source of humor and entertainment.
I think in their crazy world, the north pole is at the center of the earth disk and Antarctica is actually an ice wall around the perimeter that keeps the water on the disk. Therefore, Africa and Australia are on opposite sides of the disk (like left-right not heads-tails) or are near the out perimeter and no one would build a cable going across that long of a distance.
If that makes your brain hurt because of the stupidity, that’s because it is. Flat earthers are only good as the target of a joke because we can all agree that it’s stupid. There are some entertaining videos on YouTube of people making fun of them, or of themselves proving themselves wrong.
Sidebery is a great FF extension that provides vertical tabs, trees, and groups.
Nah, the Konami code gives you benefits.
We’re currently in the information age, which is due to silicon. In a few hundred years, this time may reasonably be called the silicon age. Society has only recently transferred to the silicon age from the previous iron age. If we don’t cause a total collapse of our society, then we will be in the silicon age for a few hundred more years, and that will likely include space colonization.
The space age you’re referring to is likely the 60s, when space exploration was beginning. A decade or two isn’t long enough to be considered an age.
deleted by creator
That’s why we name our ages after the materials within. Material science is the foundation for almost all other physical sciences.
How is the X in xitter pronounced? Is it “sh” like in Xi? This seems to fit this time line, but it would be nice to have confirmation.
Yeah, and stop having sex and listening to rock and role.
That’s a solution that just isn’t going to work. We as a society need to plan for using more and more energy. Therefore, we need to create cleaner and cleaner ways to generate that energy. If solar can be implemented until we scale up fission, that’s great. We can then rely on fission for a few hundred years until we get to fusion.
People will complain about the dangers of fission only while they ignore the dangers of fossil fuels and aren’t required to use them. As soon as fossil fuels start running out, then fission isn’t going to sound so bad. Frankly, it shouldn’t sound bad now.
Shorting a stock can be fairly risky, and if you’re not familiar with it then don’t do it.
However, if you are willing to risk some money and think a stock will go down within a certain time frame, then you could buy a put. Owning a put will allow you to get some of the gains from the stock falling for a fixed price. The risk is defined because you can’t lose more than you buy the put for. So if the stock price goes up, you will have a defined loss.
The other wrinkle with puts (or calls) is that they expire (which a short stock does not). So you need to be aware of how the price will change with time as well. It is worth doing some reading on this subject. Getting the basic idea isn’t too hard, but it is necessary before you make a purchase.
It would be good if we could find a way to distinguish between weather or airspace delays vs airline operation delays… Like we currently do with existing rules.
Do you have economic data to show that the EU rules caused, or likely caused, the price increases?
My kid’s doctor had service to transcribe the visits. Patients may opt out verbally. This is all through the hospital, so presumably it is HIPAA compliant.
Instead of creating your own solution that complies with HIPAA, it is probably easier to use one that already exists.
The hassle is that I have to have a second device to login with, and I have to keep that device with me and functioning at all times.
Obvious answer is of course my phone, but I’ve had a few situations where I needed to access an account on a new system and didn’t have a 2nd device available.
Thank you, that was a really helpful explanation that I haven’t seen elsewhere. It helps a lot and I think I now understand the difference between passwords and passkeys.
I still don’t like the hassle inherent in passkeys, but at least I understand it now.
It is my understanding that the statues that he’s being charged under do not depend on the classification of the documents. The problem is that the documents belonged to the government and were not returned upon multiple requests. Therefore, even if the documents were declassified, which they were not, the same charges could still be brought against him.