BluesF
@BluesF@feddit.uk
- Comment on Most legible scottish person 11 months ago:
Wikipedia does explain that Scots and English are sister languages, they both descend from Old English. Neither is a dialect.
- Comment on Most legible scottish person 11 months ago:
Scots isn’t just an accent, it’s a language in its own right.
Although honestly I’m not sure how much of this is Scots and how much is just specific to Scottish twitter lol
- Comment on 1.1 History 11 months ago:
Inestimable also means “of great value”
- Comment on Why does it seem like women are more wont to make noise in sexual situations while men don't? 11 months ago:
Yeah. I mean if he’s blowing it the she probably feels left out.
- Comment on This Captcha 1 year ago:
Captchas aren’t made to “defeat AI logic”, the human detection happens in part outside the picture selection part. The picture selection is for training AI. In this case you are training an AI to distinguish the (potentially abstract) concept of warmth.
- Comment on Super Mario Bros. Wonder sells 4.3m worldwide 1 year ago:
Although I haven’t tried much, I feel like the expert badges can bring some of that challenge at least, no?
- Comment on The Aliens did a little trolling 1 year ago:
Is the word for race & species in French the same? Just trying to understand the mix-up!
- Comment on The Aliens did a little trolling 1 year ago:
Agree 100% I embarrassed myself thoroughly in the sack race as a child and would like all future examples banned.
- Comment on The Aliens did a little trolling 1 year ago:
Just because you don’t like crumpets doesn’t mean there’s a need for genocide
- Comment on Neil DeGrasse Tyson explains science 1 year ago:
How dare you assume that I’m not only full of myself but also uneducated! I’ll have you know I was schooled by the finest scholars of YouTube, and received several diplomas from both Udemy and Coursera. Frankly, I am above this debate and will be removing myself henceforth! Good day!
- Comment on Maybe AI won't be taking all of our jobs after all? 1 year ago:
Yes, we absolutely are different. Okay, maybe if you really boil down every little process our brains do there are similarities, we do also do pattern recognition, yes. But that isn’t all we do, or all ML systems do, either. I think you’re selling yourself short if you think you’re just recognising patterns!
The simplest difference between us and ML systems was pointed out by another commenter - they are trained on a dataset and then they remain static. We constantly re-evaluate old information, take in new information, and formulate new thoughts and change our minds.
We are able to perceive in ways that computers just can’t - they can’t understand what a smell is because they cannot smell, they can’t understand what it is to see in the way that we do because when they process images it is exactly the same to a computer as processing any other series of numbers. They do not have abstract concepts to relate recognised patterns to. Generative AI is unable to be truly creative in the way that we can, because it doesn’t have an imagination, it is replicating based on its inputs. Although, again, people on the internet love to say “that’s what artists do”, I think it’s pretty obvious that we wouldn’t have art in the way we do today if that was true… We would still be painting on the walls of caves.
- Comment on Maybe AI won't be taking all of our jobs after all? 1 year ago:
Learnéd Machines
- Comment on Maybe AI won't be taking all of our jobs after all? 1 year ago:
Machine Learning is such a better name. It describes what is happening - a machine is learning to do some specific thing. In this case to take text and output pictures… It’s limited by what it learned from. It learned from arrays of numbers representing colours of pixels, and from strings of text. It doesn’t know what that text means, it just knows how to translate it into arrays of numbers… There is no intelligence, only limited learning.
- Comment on Productivity has grown faster in Western Europe than in America 1 year ago:
Lol why would you want to do that?
- Comment on Philosophy meme 1 year ago:
So if there is an objective truth of morality that exists beyond our judgements, in what form does it exist? Is it a fundamental part of the universe? Did it exist before humans? Or is it a part of us?
- Comment on Deep Rock Galactic: Rogue Core - Teaser Trailer 1 year ago:
I’ll second the other responses - it’s great with no friends, playing with strangers works really well.
- Comment on Deep Rock Galactic: Rogue Core - Teaser Trailer 1 year ago:
Yeah at the moment it really sounds like a roguelike game mode for DRG.
- Comment on Deep Rock Galactic: Rogue Core - Teaser Trailer 1 year ago:
It’s a teaser because the DRG community is its own hype machine lol
- Comment on Philosophy meme 1 year ago:
Animals understanding of “morality” is extremely different to what we as humans understand as moral, and I’d argue that you can’t actually ask them what they think is right or wrong, so you can’t really know if their behaviour is based on morality or… well, anything else.
Regardless, semantics aside my primary question was how you arrive at the position that “gaining from someone else’s loss is wrong” is an objective position to take… because I think that is just something you think is wrong.
- Comment on Philosophy meme 1 year ago:
So, regardless of the reasons behind it, it seems clear that we don’t all know what is right - or certainly we don’t agree - so where exactly does an objective morality fit into the picture?
- Comment on Philosophy meme 1 year ago:
So there exists an asbolute moral truth, but we have no way to determine what it is? I’m sure we can agree that morals don’t have a physical form, so in what way does it “exist”?
- Comment on Philosophy meme 1 year ago:
Of course the Nazis weren’t right by our standards, and of course they were/are by their own. But by what universal standard can we judge their morality against ours? How can we know that what we think is right is the objective morality?
Saying “it just is” really just means “I think so”, and it there’s as much reasonable backing for you to say it “just is” wrong to be a nazi as it is for someone to say it “just is” wrong to be gay.
- Comment on Philosophy meme 1 year ago:
Objectively it’s morally wrong to gain from someone’s loss. So… winning anything? Schadenfreude? A profitable short position? Picking a penny up from the ground?
Anyway, the specifics aside… how do you arrive at the conclusion that it is objectively wrong to gain from someone else’s loss?
- Comment on Philosophy meme 1 year ago:
I agree with all of that, but I don’t see how that deals with the problem that we don’t even have consensus on a morality that we are all supposed to “know” by ourselves because it is objective and somehow contained within us. Why is there such disagreement on what is moral if we should all know what’s right?
- Comment on Philosophy meme 1 year ago:
Moral “progress” only happens because of our collective judgement of what is right changing over time.
- Comment on Philosophy meme 1 year ago:
Ok so who’s deciding which people are evil and which aren’t? There are plenty of wrong things (according to me, today) that have been consensus among some for hundreds or even thousands of years. Adults marrying children. Slavery. Execution of homosexuals.
Or consider that vegan/vegetarians would say that slaughtering animals is wrong, and that they know that in the same “innate” way that you’re describing… and yet the majority disagree with them. So who’s right? Where can we get this objectivity? If it’s just our “gut” then I’m sorry but there is not a single morality, there are 7 billion separate objective moralities.
- Comment on Brexit: Labour will seek re-write of deal, Starmer says 1 year ago:
Vehement agreement from the UK
- Comment on Nitrous oxide: Laughing gas to be illegal by end of year 1 year ago:
Maybe not for you or I, but the police use it.