kryptonianCodeMonkey

@kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Donald Trump Said He Promised Ivanka He Wouldn't Date Girls Younger Than Her | “So as she grows older, the field is getting very limited.” 😬⁩ ⁨⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩:

  So to his 17 year old (or younger) had to get her dad to promise not to “date” girls her age or younger than her. Presuming she solicited this promise because, at a minimum, it was already a danger of happening, if not, indeed, had happened or was happening. And she was fully aware of that fact… yikes.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Donald Trump Said He Promised Ivanka He Wouldn't Date Girls Younger Than Her | “So as she grows older, the field is getting very limited.” 😬⁩ ⁨⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩:

  Query: What was Ivanka’s age when he promised this?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Final wishes⁩ ⁨⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩:

  Impressive that those tiny ears printed that well with an FDM printer and didnt snap off with the supports.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨well?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩:

  Again, I’m not poopooing scientific endeavor. I love science. But this person seemed to be mystified that we weren’t all majorly reacting to this news as if this possible fact, in itself, was life changing. For most people, it changes nothing about their day to day lives.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨well?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  For sure, not undervaluing scientific research and exploration by any means. But the post seemed to be a call to action or an expectation of a greater reaction to potential findings from the general public. But A) it’s honestly the first I’ve heard about any such news. And B) I don’t think the vast majority of people would have any idea how to even process that information, let alone get excited about it or understand it’s full implications, or to have any sort of reaction to it at all.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨well?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Don’t get me wrong, understanding the nature of the universe is valuable and noteworthy. But how would that information meaningfully impact anyone’s life or change their behavior or worldview beyond a general awe at the unfathomable mysteries we already have towards space as we’ve understood it for centuries? Am I meant to stare up at the sky from 8:15 to 8:30 every other night with my mouth agap while I try to wrap my mind around the spacetime bubble we all exist on the surface of? Or can I just eat dinner?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨North Korea and South Korea isn't working. Let's try West Korea and East Korea instead.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Worked for Germany /s

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨In China, delivery robots now ride the subway to restock 7-Eleven stores⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Yeah. Just need to make sure that sensible restrictions are in place to prevent the creep into turning a public service into primarily a commercial one. Starts out only running during off hours, then running during active hours at a reduced rate, then it’s got dedicated cars for the robots, then it overflows into passenger cars… you see where it’s going. Best to set up guard rails before it’s a problem.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨You'd need to calculate the compound interest⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  “5 million in a year”

  That year is 2143. And the US dollar has been defunct since 2028 (probably). Enjoy

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Emma Watson banned from driving for speeding⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  I had my license suspended for 90 days - due to a paperwork error when I was in college. I just had hope I didnt get pulled over at that time because I had no choice but to drive for school and work.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨salty⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Poor Mikey

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨salty⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  pure sodium meets saliva

  mouth catches fire

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Shark Dentist is a 'horror roguelike' that's basically The Meg mashed up with an early '90s Milton Bradley toy⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  “Haha. You lost! You have to point with your middle finger from now on!”

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  That has always been the two big problems with AI. Biases in the training, intentional or not, will always bias the output. And AI is incapable of saying “I do not have suffient training on this subject or reliable sources for it to give you a confident answer”. It will always give you its best guess, even if it is completely hallucinating much of the data. The only way to identify the hallucinations if it isn’t just saying absurd stuff on the face of it, it to do independent research to verify it, at which point you may as well have just researched it yourself in the first place.

  AI is a tool, and it can be a very powerful tool with the right training and use cases. For example, I use it at a software engineer to help me parse error codes when googling working or to give me code examples for modules I’ve never used. There is no small number of times it has been completely wrong, but in my particular use case, that is pretty easy to confirm very quickly. The code either works as expected or it doesn’t, and code is always tested before releasing it anyway.

  In research, it is great at helping you find a relevant source for your research across the internet or in a specific database. It is usually very good at summarizing a source for you to get a quick idea about it before diving into dozens of pages. It CAN be good at helping you write your own papers in a LIMITED capacity, such as cleaning up your writing in your writing to make it clearer, correctly formatting your bibliography (with actual sources you provide or at least verify), etc. But you have to remember that it doesn’t “know” anything at all. It isn’t sentient, intelligent, thoughtful, or any other personification placed on AI. None of the information it gives you is trustworthy without verification. It can and will fabricate entire studies that do not exist even while attributed to real researcher. It can mix in unreliable information with reliable information becuase there is no difference to it.

  Put simply, it is not a reliable source of information… ever. Make sure you understand that.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  The “funny” thing is, that’s probably not even at Elon’s request. I doubt that he is self-aware enough to know that he is a narcissist that only wants Grok to be his parrot. He thinks he is always right and wants Grok to be “always right” like him, but he would have to acknowledge some deep-seeded flaws in himself to consciously realize that all he wants is for Grok to be the wall his voice echos off of, and everything I’ve seen about the man indicates that he is simply not capable of that kind of self-reflection. The X engineers that have been dealing with the constant meddling of this egotistical man-child, however, surely have his measure pretty thoroughly and knew exactly what Elon ultimately wants is more Elon and would cynically create a Robo-Elon doppelganger to shut him the fuck up about it.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨USA 🇺🇸 USA 🇺🇸 USA⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Either we’re all fish, whales and dolphins are fish, or nothing is fish. All three positions are perfectly justifiable depending on your critieria, so take your pick.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Dunkin' Donuts Drinks⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Starbucks white mocha frappaccino is too sweet by half. But Starbucks white mocha frappaccino with an extra shot (or two extra shots!)… Delightful.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨US | Trump and Congress finalize law that could hurt your Wi-Fi⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  And you think they understand or care about that? This administration?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Time travel doesn't work unless you also have teleportation. If you travel to the past/future, Earth will be in a different position in its orbit, and you'll die in space.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  The microwave background is like a rainbow. When you move, it appears to move. You’re always at the “center” of it.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Time travel doesn't work unless you also have teleportation. If you travel to the past/future, Earth will be in a different position in its orbit, and you'll die in space.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Space and time are the same thing. Spacetime. Time travel would necessarily also by teleportation if you are traveling instantaneously through spacetime. Unless of course your travel is continuous like it is currently for all of us, just sped up, slowed down or reversed.

  Also there is n9 objective point of reference for location in the universe, only relative points of reference. In other words, you are always some distance in some direction from some thing. But you never have objective stable coordinates relative to the universe itself. Tere is no “center” or other fixed point of the universe. So the earth is moving, yes, but only relative to other independent celestial bodies. And those bodies are moving, too, relative to other bodies. Their movement is always relative to a non-absolute frame of reference. No movement is objective to the universe, it’s all relative.

  So it would be illogical to expect the earth to have moved X miles away in Y direction if you teleported one second into the past/future because that would presuppose that your location was objective and absolute in the universe at the point of time traveling and the earth moved relative to your absolute location. It would break known physics if that were the case, as much as time travel itself would.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨As of 30 minutes ago at the time of posting, the NYPD has detained two young Black men after they refused to show ID without explanation or cause.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  As another said, reasonable and articulable suspicion is required to id in every state and city in the country regardless of any lower laws or fishnet policies. However(!), they do not have to share that reasonable suspicion with you at all, and can still demand ID without giving it to you. They can have reasonable suspicion against you that you are not aware of, such as matching a description for a crime you’re not involved in. And They could very well have no reasonable suspicion and can lie in the report later if they need to justify it. So long as there isn’t evidence contradicting them, the cop’s word is assumed as fact. So a demand for ID that is lawful is indistinguishable from an unlawful one if they don’t give you the details of their suspicion because you have no way to know if such reason exists or if it’s reasonable or not.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨As of 30 minutes ago at the time of posting, the NYPD has detained two young Black men after they refused to show ID without explanation or cause.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  So the 4th amendment of the US Constitution, which outlines the freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, protects people from being forced to verbally identify or show documents of identification without reasonable cause, among other things. What that has been interpreted to mean by the SCOTUS is that, while they can always request ID without it being a lawful order, a request you can deny without consequence, any policy or state/local ID law that requires identification upon officer request without any other reasonable cause is unlawful. In other words they cannot demand id for no actual reason nor punish you for failing to ID without said reason.

  At minimum, they need “reasonable and articulable suspicion” of a real crime that has happened, is happening, or is about to happen, in order to legally require you to ID yourself in every state, district, and city in the country (with the exception of if you are driving a car and get pulled over for a lawful infraction, you must provide your license to prove you’re allowed to drive the vehicle). “Reasonable and articulable suspicion” means that there are real facts that can be pointed to that a reasonable person would deem as a likely indication of crime, not hunches or racial profiling. Some states have higher levels of requirements in order to ID someone, but none can have lower requirements.

  BUT, the unfortunate and infuriating truth is that they do not need to actually explain their reasonable and articulate suspicion to you at the time, which ultimately means that they dont have to have it until they justify it to the court much later. They could be just demanding it for no reason unlawfully. Or they could be demanding it because they just saw you pick pocket someone, or someone pointed you out as someone that threatened them, or you match the description of the person that just broke a bunch of windows nearby. All of those things qualify at reasonable suspicion allowing them to ID you in places where that is the minimum requirement. Even if you did nothing wrong, you could still match a description but aren’t the right guy, or they thought that saw you do something unlawful but were actually mistaken. It doesn’t matter. They still have reasonable suspicion unless you somehow factually dispel that suspicion. If you do not dispel that suspicion (maybe because they didn’t even explain their reasons in the first place) and they demand ID, you can be lawfully required to present it even if you did absolutely nothing wrong and don’t have a clue why they are asking at all.

  In other words, if they demand ID and don’t explain why, there’s functionally way to discern at the time if the demand is lawful or unlawful even if you have committed no crimes. So you either comply or go to jail and argue your case in court later, regardless of the truth. And btw, even if they had absolutely no reasonable suspicion to lawfully demand ID at the time, they can just lie to justify it. If the lie is not demonstrably shown to be a lie by other evidence, it’s assumed to be true. So… enjoy your “freedoms”, I guess.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Chocolate chip is a great cookie, but only if it's melty. If it's crunchy, it's just an average cookie.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Crunchy cookies are only acceptable if they soften when dunked in milk.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Having the ability to lie and manipulate with no remorse will get you much further in this world than having morals and being correct⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  That’s why I included the last bit. The law is more relevant when you are not someone too special. The higher you get, the less it matters, if only because more people have fallen for your manipulations or are cognizant of them but support them for whatever reason, and will defend you no matter what from actual justice.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Having the ability to lie and manipulate with no remorse will get you much further in this world than having morals and being correct⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Depends what you mean by “further”. It is a trait that definitely serves well in some very lucrative areas like business or politics. But it very easy to ruin other aspects of your life like your relationships, your public image, and can run you afoul of the law. In areas of work where your image is paramount, being a liar and manipulator usually only gets you so far because it’s very hard to maintain those lies and hide the manipulation under massive public scrutiny, particularly if you’re doing illegal stuff in addition to it. Of course the wealthier you are, or the more fanatical your following, the more you will have others lie and manipulate on your behalf, so… accountability can decrease that way.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The name "seagull" implies the existence of landgulls, airgulls, and firegulls.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Captain Planet Gull: “Give me those chips and I’ll poop on you!”

  You: “… don’t you mean ‘or’ you will poop on me, not ‘and’?”

  Captain Planet Gull: …

  You: …

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Finally paid off my Costco hotdog 🙏⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  “In just 4 easy payments…”

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I have never in my 43 years heard of anyone else with the first name Sigourney.⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  but in the English speaking world I’d say it’s the most unique name I’ve heard.

  Probably because it actually a French surname, which is itself based on a place name in France that no longer exists… and it is not her actual given name, but something she adopted from a character in The Great Gatsby.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Judge Rules Training AI on Authors' Books Is Legal But Pirating Them Is Not⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  No it’s a tool, created and used by people. If you use a tool to intentionally do things that would be illegal for you to do without the tool, then that’s still illegal. You can argue that maybe the law should be more strict with AI if you have a justification, but there’s really no way to justify being less strict.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Judge Rules Training AI on Authors' Books Is Legal But Pirating Them Is Not⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s preety simple as I see it. You treat AI like a person. A person needs to go through legal channels to consume material, so piracy for AI training is as illegal as it would be for personal consumption. Consuming legally possessed material for “inspiration” or “study” is also fine for a person, so it is fine for AI training as well. Commercializing derivative works that infringes on copyright is illegal for a person, so it should be illegal for an AI as well. All materials, even those inspired by another piece of media, are permissible if not monetized, otherwise they need to be suitably transformative. That line can be hard to draw even when AI is not involved, but that is the legal standard for people, so it should be for AI as well. If I browse through Deviant Art and learn to draw similarly my favorite artists from their publically viewable works, and make a legally distinct cartoon mouse by hand in a style that is similar to someone else’s and then I sell prints of that work, that is legal. The same should be the case for AI.

  But! Scrutiny for AI should be much stricter given the inherent lack of true transformative creativity. And any AI that has used pirated materials should be penalized either by massive fines or by wiping their training and starting over with legally licensed or purchased or otherwise public domain materials only.