tal

It might be nice if auto reviewers included a “privacy rating” for a vehicle based OK whether it broadcasts anything via radio (e.g. cell or tire-pressure systems can be used to identify someone). It’s not just auto manufacturers, but anyone who wants to set up a radio monitoring network, if there are unique IDs being broadcast.

I don’t know how a reviewer could know whether there’s a way for a manufacturer to gather logs during maintenance.

I don’t think that there’s an immediate application for specifically making carrots, because I doubt that the economics work, but I can imagine a world where we manufacture a lot more food than we do today.

Reddit had the ability to have a per-subreddit wiki. I never dug into it on the moderator side, but it was useful for some things like setting up pages with subreddit rules and the like. I think that moderators had some level of control over it, at least to allow non-moderator edits or not, maybe on a per-page basis.

That could be a useful option for communities; I think that in general, there is more utility for per-community than per-instance wiki spaces, though I know that you admin a server with one major community which you also moderate, so in your case, there may not be much difference.

I don’t know how amenable django-wiki is to partitioning things up like that, though.

EDIT: https://www.reddit.com/wiki/wiki/ has a brief summary.

The closest competitor is, what, Unreal Engine? That’s more costly.

“This guy is definitely AI.”

Max wants to push alerts on viewers when there is breaking news on CNN.

I could maybe see there being a market for this if the default is not to show them, and there’s an option to receive notification of developments on a specific topic. It’s better than rabidly refreshing a particular topic that you are specially interested in.

Like, say you live in an area with an approaching hurricane, and you wanted to be alerted if there are any new developments on that particular topic.

However, I have a hard time believing that, in the general case, people want alerts popping up.

I broadly agree that “cloud” has an awful lot of marketing fluff to it, as with many previous buzzwords in information technology.

However, I also think that there was legitimately a shift from a point in time where one got a physical box assigned to them to the point where VPSes started being a thing to something like AWS. A user really did become increasingly-decoupled from the actual physical hardware.

With a physical server, I care about the actual physical aspects of the machine.

With a VPS, I still have “a VPS”. It’s virtualized, yeah, but I don’t normally deal with them dynamically.

With something like AWS, I’m thinking more in terms of spinning up and spinning down instances when needed.

I think that it’s reasonable to want to describe that increasing abstraction in some way.

Is it a fundamental game-changer? In general, I don’t think so. But was there a shift? Yeah, I think so.

And there might legitimately be some companies for which that is a game-changer, where the cost-efficiencies of being able to scale up dynamically to handle peak load on a service are so important that it permits their service to be viable at all.

It sounds like it’s just trusting whatever people plonk in in searches, so you can presumably poison their database with whatever GPA and SAT score you want.

AI will also solve the housing affordability crisis too so you won’t need to worry about that…right?!?

I mean, realistically, I do expect someone to put together a viable robotic house-construction robot at some point.

https://www.homelight.com/blog/buyer-how-much-does-it-cost-to-build-a-house/

A rough breakdown of the overall costs of building a home will look like this:

Labor: 40%

Also, I’d bet that it cuts into materials cost, because you don’t need to provide the material in a form convenient for a human to handle.

I’ve seen people creating habitations with large-scale 3d printers, but that’s not really a practical solution. It’s just mechanically-simple, so easier to make the robot.

I don’t know if it needs to use what we’d think of as AI today to do that. Maybe it will, if that’s a way to solve some problems conveniently. But I do think that automating house construction will happen at some point in time.

They know nothing they haven’t seen before

Strictly speaking, you arguably don’t either. Your knowledge of the world is based on your past experiences.

You do have more-sophisticated models than current generative AIs do, though, to construct things out of aspects of the world that you have experienced before.

The current crop are effectively more-sophisticated than simply pasting together content – try making an image and then adding “blue hair” or something, and you can get the same hair, but recolored. And they ability to replicate artistic styles is based on commonalities in seen works, but you don’t wind up seeing chunks of material just done by that artist.

Like, you have a concept of relative characteristics, and the current generative AIs do not. You can tell a human artist “make those breasts bigger”, and they can extrapolate from a model built on things they’ve seen before. The current crop of generative AIs cannot. But I expect that the first bigger-breast generative AI is going to attract users, based on a lot of what generative AIs are being used for now.

There is also, as I understand it, some understanding of depth in images in some existing systems, but the current generative AIs don’t have a full 3d model of what they are rendering.

But they’ll get more-sophisticated.

I would imagine that there will be a combination of techniques. LLMs may be used, but I doubt that they will be pure LLMs.

Public domain absolutely exists in the EU.

Hmm. There was some kind of issue with that in the EU that led to the creation of a Creative Commons license, IIRC. Maybe nonstandardized handling of stuff not under copyright. I remember that in the US, putting something in the public domain wasn’t an issue, but in at least some of the EU, it was important to use Creative Commons instead.

I think that something not being under copyright isn’t analogous everywhere.

googles

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public-domain-equivalent_license

In 2009, Creative Commons released CC0, which was created for compatibility with jurisdictions where dedicating to public domain is problematic, such as continental Europe.[citation needed] This is achieved by a public-domain waiver statement and a fall-back all-permissive license, for cases where the waiver is not valid.

Arguably a good application for AI image-to-prompt functionality, I suppose.

I do kind of wonder what the end-game is in terms of fertility rates in society if we can manufacture ever-more-perfect simulations of sex.

The Amish might still be around, but…

Yeah, I think that there may be something like that – the ability to prove things with a camera is useful – but it’s gonna be more-complicated than just that. It’s consumer hardware. If you just do that, someone is gonna figure out how to extract the keys on at least one model and then you can forge authenticated images with it.

or take your job.

The unemployment line there makes for quite the mental image.

The “Erect Horse Penis - Concept LoRA,” an image generating AI model that instantly produces images of women with erect horse penises as their genitalia, has been downloaded 16,000 times, and has an average score of five out of five stars, despite criticism from users.

The existence of the Liberian flag registry!

I’d bet that there’s a spoof website out there somewhere, and that’s where it got it from.

EDIT: Also:

poisoning the results

Heh.

It got trained on the Internet, I imagine.

Ehhhh. This isn’t as exciting as you might think for, say, graphics. It’s predicated on the fact that in the case, there’s no human involvement.

Howell found that “courts have uniformly declined to recognize copyright in works created absent any human involvement,” citing cases where copyright protection was denied for celestial beings, a cultivated garden, and a monkey who took a selfie.

“Undoubtedly, we are approaching new frontiers in copyright as artists put AI in their toolbox to be used in the generation of new visual and other artistic works,” the judge wrote.

The rise of generative AI will “prompt challenging questions” about how much human input into an AI program is necessary to qualify for copyright protection, Howell said, as well as how to assess the originality of AI-generated art that comes from systems trained on existing copyrighted works.

But this case “is not nearly so complex” because Thaler admitted in his application that he played no role in creating the work, Howell said.

They’re just gonna nail down the line judicially on how much human involvement is required and then they’ll have a human do that much.

I mean, AI tools are gonna be just increasingly incorporated into tools for humans to use.

It might be significant for something like chatbot output, though.

I mean, scrolling down that list, those all make sense.

I’m not arguing that Google should have kept them going.

But I think that it might be fair to say that Google did start a number of projects and then cancel them – even if sensibly – and that for people who start to rely on them, that’s frustrating.

In some cases, like with Google Labs stuff, it was very explicit that anything there was experimental and not something that Google was committing to. If one relied on it, well, that’s kind of their fault.