The many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics doesn’t mean this, even a tiny little bit. Even if it did it’s silly to make decisions based on the hypothetical implications of an unfalsifiable interpretation.
The many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics doesn’t mean this, even a tiny little bit. Even if it did it’s silly to make decisions based on the hypothetical implications of an unfalsifiable interpretation.
£100k per year is not middle class, it’s the top 3% of the country.
I grew up middle class, my family are lawyers, high level civil servants, software engineers. I don’t know anyone who earns £100k.
How does this argument not also apply to photography? A modern camera is a computer, you fiddle with the settings, press a button and it automatically makes a picture for you. People produce billions of shitty photographs a day which aren’t art, but that doesn’t mean someone working in photography as a medium can’t be an artist.
In my experience it’s only non-artists who make this argument, because in their heads they’re comparing AI to painting. But for visual artists there are tons of mediums and disciplines where you don’t physically make the marks yourself and it’s the concept and composition that’s important.
There was an exhibition of AI generated art at the big local gallery here last year and I expected artist friends to be against it, but they were just like “oh, that’s interesting”. They just see AI generation as another way of creating an image and whether a particular image is or isn’t art depends on the intention not the process.
Is this part of a series or something? I have no idea what any part of it means
Also they shouldn’t do it unless they’re going to apply it to all politicians, like when Biden lied about seeing photos of beheaded babies in Israel.
All the answers you got show why this conversation goes badly. No one can come up with an actual problem that data collection causes, it’s all silly comparisons to giving people your credit card number or shitting in front of them.
For me, having my data collected is like having CCTV cameras in stores. Yeah, technically someone is filming everything I do. Yeah it would be bad if a private individual was filming me for nefarious reasons. But no one actually uses that data for anything bad, and it doesn’t actually cause any problems.
All that happens is I get more relevant ads.
Looks like they commited a change to Piped bot two hours ago which accidentally removed the functionality to actually change the link. Whoops!
Absolutely. I tried getting back into Usenet a few years ago and it was like Yahoo Answers.
Weird how it’s literally impossible to ever live without something no one had 100 years ago
Funny thing is, my career is more successful than my parents but their pensions are still more than I earn lmao
This is the only reason why anyone wears any particular type of clothing. There is no style of clothing that it objectively makes sense to wear.
I’ve never doubted the Tiananmen Square massacre before, but there are so many posts lately insisting it happened I’m starting to think maybe it didn’t
I suspect a lot of “breakages” were failed pacman updates due to signing issues, before pacman knew to update arch-keyring first. I know one person who moved to another distro when that happened.
Do you have any cases you can point out?
I can’t find it now either, but I’ve read about a German doctor convicted as a serial killer solely because she was present at the deaths of too many patients. In that case she was present at the death of every patient for like 3 months, which sounds like strong evidence against her. Until you think about it and realize that if she murdered them, that means no one died of natural causes for 3 months. Also in that case the number of deaths on the ward actually went up after she was arrested.
Similar but not to do with doctors, Sally Clarke was wrongly convicted of killing her children, purely because both of them had died of SIDS. The prosecution said SIDS is rare and so it happening twice was impossible. What’s worrying about that case is, everyone now says the miscarriage of justice was that the prosecutor incorrectly calculated the chances of two children dying of SIDS, when the actual fallacy was using the statistics as evidence at all. 1 in 73 million is the chance that one specific child will die of SIDS. The chance that any child will die of SIDS is 100%! 200 die in the UK every year! You can’t just go around arresting every parent on the basis that they were unlucky!
What’s really missing in everything I’ve seen is an actual statistical analysis. Everything I’ve seen is just “She was present at 20 deaths, when her colleagues were only present at 10”. Yeah, but how unlikely is that? How many nurses per year will be in exactly the same situation in the UK, or in the world? How unusual was the number of deaths in that hospital while there was supposedly a serial killer operating, versus a normal year?
Sure, the chances of her specifically being that unlucky are astronomical. But the chances that somebody out of the 9 billion people on earth will be that unlucky are pretty good.
Having tried to do something similar, “Nothing, Forever” must have some pretty serious coding to engineer the prompts and reconstruct tiny snippets of AI generated dialogue into a full meaningful script. I wonder if that’s enough for the creators to claim copyright.
if I take a hoop/window and place it quickly over an object
Then the velocity of the object relative to the “exit” of the hoop would be the same as the velocity of the object relative to the “entrance” of the hoop, which is option B.
In your analogy, option A would mean the object has a relative velocity of entering the hoop but suddenly no relative velocity exiting it, so the object magically starts following the hoop.
We might still be wrong about her.
Honestly this looks like one of those statistical murder convictions. Random chance means that every few years, somewhere in the world, some medical professional will be present at a series of unusual deaths. They end up in prison even though there’s no other evidence.
I’m trying to find out what the actual evidence against Letby was, but so far I can only find one scribbled post it note written during a mental breakdown after being arrested. Which, she could have just been writing down things people were saying about her.
Interestingly twitter’s “block” function did originally just mute people. I remember being blocked in around 2010 and it didn’t stop you following or reading their tweets. At first I was confused when people started requesting the true block functionality - what’s the point when tweets are publicly available to logged out users?
When you’ve never been harassed, like me or Musk or twitter’s original engineers, you don’t immediately understand that allowing (muted) interaction feeds the harassment and can still spread it around into a pile-on by non muted users.
Luckily most people get it now, but it looks like Musk wants to turn the clock back on it.
Yeah it pisses me off the way people are like “tech bros ruined the internet”. No, users ruined it! There was no reason to stop self-hosting webpages, forums and IRC servers. Users switched to Facebook instead because they preferred it and didn’t care about the downsides. There’s an alternative to every website and app which respects privacy, serves no ads, and has no algorithm to farm your outrage. Users refuse to use them because they aren’t cool enough.