JayDee

That's fair, but this issue is solved in European cities, via mass transit lowering the number of cars on the road, ambulances being built smaller to fit down narrow passages, and wide bike lanes which ambulances use in emergencies. If anything, NY might be one of the cities most poised to implement all these, if it can just get its shit together.

So close to salvation

Honestly, we don't know where he was actually aiming. He could've been aiming center mass and just sucked, which might line up with the whole story about him not being allowed into the marksmanship club at his school.

The Azov brigade... Is that different from the Azov Battalion - as in the portion of the Ukrainian military that was raising red flags for being known for only recruiting fascists? I had thought they majority died in Mariupol.

My gut tells me to probably meet criticism from this guy with a healthy dose of skepticism. Obviously should still listen, since these criticisms do matter. I just don't know how much I trust where it's coming from.

Edit: switched 'branch' to 'portion', since 'branch' is a more formal subdivision than I'm meaning.

Went ahead and looked up the original site and article in question: it's not worth it. This person exclusively holds a stance of "O RLY??? (arms crossed, eyebrow raised)" to anything after the ultraviolet catastrophe's resolution. They don't have any solutions to the questions science has been trying to resolve. They just want to call the scientific community a bunch of quacks. They're an anti-intellectual.

If anyone wants to read the article and make their own comments, feel free. I will not be linking it because it does not deserve platforming, just like all the other unsubstantive ideas that die in darkness.

EDIT: After also looking through the other articles, I do not in the slightest doubt that this article was AI slop. It reads like a bunch of summaries plucked out of Wikipedia. The other articles in question are: "AI Patent Assistance", "Framework for LLM-Assisted Innovation and Strategy", " Perceptron to Quantum AI", "Novel Approach to AI Benchmarking", " Unmasking AI Bias", and "Untapped Potential of Mobile AI". They also have a bunch more anti-intellectual drivel like " Physicists are Clueless", "Evolution Flaws and Solutions in Quantum Measurement", and " Exposing the Flaws of Conventional Scientific Wisdom".

You're stance is literally just anti-establishment with no original conjectures. You're discourse is worthless for furthering physics. Rather than propel the field forward, your dialog exists only to attack current progress and cause hesitation.

If you actually came up with a single testable claim, even if immediately refuted by evidence, you still would have contributed more to scientific discourse than your rant did just now.

Science is about finding the best answers for the questions we get from our observations about the world. We do not throw out these answers, no matter how bizarre and unwanted they may be, if they fit the evidence we have. We only seek better ones as we go.

Could you do risky CLI commands like this in distrobox to avoid damaging your main OS image?

That's a view from the perspective of utility, yeah. The downvotes here are likely also from a ethics standpoint, since most LLMs currently trained are doing so by using other peoples' work without permission, all while using large amounts of water for cooling, and energy from our mostly coal-powered grid. This is also not mentioning the physical and emotional labor that many untrained workers are required to do when sifting through the datasets of these LLMs, removing unsavory data for extremely low wages.

A smaller, more specialized LLM could likely perform this same functionality with a much less training, on a more exclusive data set (probably only a couple of terabytes at its largest I'd wager), and would likely be small enough to run on most users' computers after training. That'd be the more ethical version of this use case.

I think it's important to also use the more specific term here: LLM. We've been creating AI automation for years for ourselves, the difference now is that software vendors are adding LLMs to the mix now.

I've hear this argument before in other instances. Ghidra, for example, just had an LLM pipeline rigged up by LaurieWired to take care of the more tedious process of renaming various functions during reverse engineering. It's not the end of the analysis process during reverse engineering, it just takes out a large amount of busy work. I don't know about the use-case you described but it sounds similar. It also seems feasible that you could train an AI system on your own system (given you have enough reversed engineered programs) and then run it locally to do this kind of work, which is a far cry from the disturbingly large LLMs that are guzzling massive amounts of data and energy to learn and run.

EDIT: To be clear, because LaurieWired's pipeline still relies on normal LLMs which are unethically trained, her pipeline using it is also unethical. It has the potential to be ethical, but currently is unethical.

And we can see by the ratio that this was in fact a hot take.

It feels like your making a semantic argument to downplay how tight grip these softwares have on their respective industry markets.

If you are only ever considered for a job if you have Photoshop experience, and that is the normal treatment across the majority of the industry, that's a standard that the industry is now holding you to - an industry standard if you will. It does not need to be backed by a governing body for it to still count.

My current understanding is that you will not get a job at a major CGI company by knowing Blender (though the film 'Flow' shows that might change going forward). You have to know softwares like Houdini, 3ds Max, Maya, etc..., if you want to be treated seriously.

That entire solution immediately falls apart when the paradigm is patented by the vendor, who immediately sues any competing software using UI elements even vaguely similar to theirs. This has been going on for decades, and the three things that usually happen are that the competitor either gets bought up, sued out of existence, or has to keep their UI different enough that there is little-to-no bleedover between the userbases (and usually starves to death from too little revenue).