Like I said, social media. “It happened” in the kind of environment where people tend to get kinda deranged about politics.

For sure, most references to the phrase these days will get you leftists complaining about it, justifiably and otherwise. I checked and got the same results. But it was still a thing. I can’t tell you how much because I don’t have the time or energy to investigate that, but it wasn’t just leftists being sarcastic. It was real.

so we need to vote for a dead fish,

please dear god can we blame the metaphorical fish for committing suicide, please, this was a decision they consciously made. I’m so tired of infighting. I’m genuinely exhausted

This right here. I wish I’d thought of saying it like this before; you’ve made your understanding of your interlocutor’s position clear, while also explaining how withholding votes can be powerful and shouldn’t be thrown out as an option. Well said!

Important to remember that this kind of system can and will have problems of its own aplenty; unions can turn bad, too. Still, I agree it’d almost certainly be better than what we have now, low a bar as that is.

It happened a lot when Biden was the nominee, and again for Harris too. It’s probably not the kind of thing you’d hear from regular people though—most political sayings aren’t, because real people in real life touching grass together tend to be more normal than that. It’s more common on social media and the like, and can probably be traced back to political campaigns, honestly. Still important to push back against, because even if people don’t say it, that doesn’t mean they won’t believe it.

You were the only one here suggesting this required an explanation.

Alright, I think you’re being deliberately antagonistic now. Bye!

I was suggesting that no one else needs it explained to them either.

You’d hope so! But alas, some idiots exist. And when a title like this appears, it becomes difficult to tell if such an idiot wrote it at first glance, and more to point, a title like that tends to create more idiots (and it’s also just kinda offensive). That’s why it’s important not to write headlines like this.

Sidenote: If you want people to not take things personally, avoid personal pronouns. “Is that something that you need explained?” → “Is that something that people need explained?” It makes a world of difference and I’m confident I’ve avoided several arguments that could’ve spawned from my own posts thanks to making that kind of change. Not foolproof, sure – we are on the internet – but it helps.

In case anyone’s like me and was curious if such a claim might’ve had a conflict-of-interest in it, have a look at the site’s logo:

I’m gonna go with “yes.”

You didn’t stop reading? Then it’s a bit weird that you’d think I don’t know autistic people have empathy, unless you decided to arbitrarily take the most bad faith reading you could’ve done. If that’s the case, I recommend taking breathers before posting so that you don’t do that.

Did you stop reading the rest of the post when you saw that? Because it really looks like you did.

You can read that from the article text, but a) the text doesn’t appear to actually suggest autistic people do have empathy, which is a problem since b) the title absolutely implies they don’t.

At best, this is a terrible headline. But if I’m being honest, I don’t have much respect for an article that seems to be all too eager to tout the erstwhile benefits of an LLM, let alone one that is in all likelihood teaching people how to act more like an LLM. So I’m not inclined to take a charitable interpretation.

Everyone anti-AI I know (which is most of everyone I know who’s cognizant of AI) would respond by either finding a therapist who can promise they won’t do that, or else not get therapy at all.

LLMs are not worth trusting for basically anything, and a lot of fields are quickly realizing this. I keep my finger on the pulse of programming and there’s a lot of negative sentiment there too—I’ve never used LLMs to code and I never will, but I know of a few folks who’ve explicitly said how much it screws things up, and I’ve seen studies that found it to be seriously lacking at best.

I am aware. […] Pathfinding, which is one element of that in video games (see literally any NPC that moves in a game), is purely algorithmic, and a lot of people who used “AI” to refer to ML would disagree that Dijkstra’s algorithm is “AI”.

Yes, I know what Dijkstra’s is. I’ve spent plenty enough of my life in game development to know that. You don’t need to link it, and it wasn’t relevant to either of my points. I’m not, nor was I ever, arguing that people regularly called pathfinding algorithms “AI.”

Anyway: I find it befuddling why you’d claim that AI is an “opaque term” equivalent to technobabble right after describing

the common usage (the “AI” in a video game) meant something that could perform actions on behalf of a human

…which would indicate that a great number of people would find the word perfectly understandable and useful. I wouldn’t expect it to fit the category of “common usage” otherwise. And I’d further find it strange to believe that a term having multiple meanings is somehow to its discredit, if that’s what your suggesting. “AI” had a solid place in language well before chatbots took off, as have many words describing broad categories.

The changelog lists 30 significant changes, of which the top new feature is integrating Whisper. This means whisper.cpp, which is Georgi Gerganov’s entirely local and offline version of OpenAI’s Whisper automatic speech recognition model. The bottom line is that FFmpeg can now automatically subtitle videos for you.

Yeah hey, can anyone chime in if this is at all based off LLMs? Because my problems with the incorrect plagiarism machine don’t end just because it’s now the offline incorrect plagiarism machine. Making OpenAI’s garbage hockey open source doesn’t make it okay. Or should I just start calling this shit FOSSwashing?

I dug around for a bit and couldn’t find much of anything, but judging by a look at the Github pages for both versions of Whisper, it’s looking very related. If that’s the case, fuck right off. I don’t want AI in FFmpeg, either.

Artificial intelligence as a term has had decades of use in videogames as a word to describe many different imitations and appearances of intelligence, as well as the many stepping stones on the long road toward intelligence. Claiming it was a meaningless term is doing a disservice to history. And something being math doesn’t make it any less real, else our own intelligence would be questionable; after all, sufficiently complicated math can represent our own brains, too.

I weep for what chatbots have done to the image of this field.

Are you commenting on AI as we knew it before LLMs entered the picture, or AI as companies refer to it today? Between your comments, I can’t tell.

Personally, I’d argue that ML qualifies as AI if we’re using the former definition, but not if we’re using the latter, if only because the latter is a horrifically useless corporate buzzword that has no place in any sane human lexicon.

A lot of us held our noses and voted for Kamala anyway, and yet…

Y’all said that last election.

…something strange appears to have happened that election.

Vote Blue No Matter Who is, as a voting strategy, insane. You call people single-issue, but this strategy cares for no issue; if the Democratic nominee shot someone in the lungs on video in cold blood, you’d suggest we vote for them anyway because the Republican shot someone else twice. Trans people are expendable, homeless people are expendable, immigrants are expendable. Everyone is expendable so long as Team Blue wins. Or for that matter, when they don’t—it’s not like the strategy seems to be working, after all.

At what point do you admit that Democrat politicians have agency and can choose to change their policies? How badly do they have to hurt you before you demand that they do better? Why do you blame us for their decision to have fucking awful policy?

We have a two-party system, but that does not limit us to two options. We can have better candidates, but that requires us to stand together rather than letting ourselves be held hostage by a party that hates us and assuming that democracy exists only within a voting booth. Stop giving up.

Agreed. And this is why the Democrats need to change yesterday.

deleted by creator

There is absolutely anti-Newsom astroturfing going on right now.

I don’t trust that mail any more than you do. But you know what I also don’t like? Being compared to it.

I have a feeling that if we’d been complaining about this a few months back there’d have been a decent chance you’d have nodded your head and said “Yeah, Gavin has some serious problems.” But now that he’s being talked up as a presidential candidate, we get this. And it’s just as utterly ridiculous as the last n times I’ve heard it.

He’s getting criticized a lot now because there’s a push to have him go for the presidency. That’s a big deal! It gets attention! And it’s a serious goddamn concern for people who don’t want a fucking transphobe president! That’s not astroturfing, for God’s sake!

If there was ever a time to push for a less shit candidate, it’s NOW, way before the election. If you’re going to shit on us for demanding better now of all times, then it doesn’t sound to me like you want us to have better at all.