jonhendry

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

They've been playing the long game. It's all been building up to this.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Shit like this is exactly why I'm skeptical of FTX boy's Adderall prescription.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

"Those Who Build Omelas"

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

What if the webcam were upside down.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The thing about AI designing and building robots is that making physical things is vastly more expensive than pooping out six-fingered portrait jpegs. All that trial-and-error learning would not come cheap. Even if the AI were controlling CNC machining centers.

There's no guarantee that the AI would have access to enough parts and materials to be able to be trained to a level of sufficient competence.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Not like that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Are we sure it isn't Musk behind the "AI"?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Someone please set up a “GrimesHouseboatAI” account with appropriate tweets, sort of Marvin the Android if he were stuck in a Minneapolis impound yard for 15 years, and also dumb.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Good lord I can't imagine learning about things on Facebook.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

It's probably more true if you include disabilities that you may not be considering. Acquired hearing loss, blindness due to retinitis pigmentosa, chronic back pain, etc. I find it very hard to believe that a person who lost their vision in an industrial accident wouldn't leap at a chance to have their vision back. And obviously not all policies to reduce the incidence of disabilities are about eugenics. OSHA isn't a eugenics program. Vitamin K shots and eye ointment for newborns reduce disability without being eugenics. I assume even blind disability activists don't think babies should be put at risk of easily avoidable blindness.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

I suspect that was simply Singer's nod to religious opposition to voluntary contraception and he wasn't necessarily suggesting that the things you list are viable options.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Some meta-analyses do kinda have the vibe of collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps, combining weak studies and claiming a strong result. (Case in point: some of the bogus studies of ivermectin etc for covid). Not all of them, but if you're not working in a field (and good at evaluating methods etc) you probably should wait for someone in the field to evaluate meta-analyses in the field.

view more: ‹ prev next ›