I've noticed a big shift toward, "We should be teaching kids how to cite AI."
That's antithetical to citations. A citation points you to the original source. Citing AI is effectively erasing original sources in a misguided effort to "teach students how to responsibly use AI tools."
Responsible use is teaching people that AI tools are plagiarism machines. Period.
Ok, likely unproductive response, but what the actual fuck!
Is this the education system still getting to grips with Wikipedia and the internet maybe being not entirely irrelevant and so applying the same degree of acceptance of Wikipedia to AI?
Or is this corporate propaganda?
Or just desperation at not know what to do anymore as tech disrupts traditional education structures (a real problem I’d wager)?
Either way, citing AI is just dumb and betrays someone who’s confused about AI
Makes sense. But still, seems like a quick capitulation which implies there’s more perceived heft behind AI. In part I’d say because it actually looks convincing and that traditional assessment is actually disrupted by it.
My bias here being that I suspect it a largely good thing that AI does disrupt traditional educational assessment as it likely reveals the superficiality in education that AI achieves.
I'm slowly realising that I probably have some mild #LongCovid
Since having covid (now had it twice since 2022): iron deficiencies, breathing problems, constant asthma, and now a sudden allergy to some foods apparently.
My partner and I have been careful throughout the pandemic but clearly not careful enough at times (twice each) since "opening up".
And though it could be far far worse, I feel pretty violated right now TBH.
I wasn’t looking for sympathy, just sharing an experience.
You have no idea what my background is or for what reasons I’ve been infected in the past.
What’s more you’re completely neglecting the importance of the social dimensions that lead to widespread infection of an airborn virus while trumping up absolute individualism as the sole basis of responsibility and blame.
All of which is a rather flawed outlook IMO, along with a poor demeanour TBH.
Well yea. The responsibilities we take for our actions are obviously important (and should be addressed more IMO), but blaming the sick for not protecting themselves rather than focusing on those negligent in preventing infection and in not taking care of others … is a choice.
There are problems here too. I suspect this is a fundamental issue that decentralised social media hasn’t taken seriously enough. It’s a bit like back and front end people not working together well. Protocol people can be inclined to underestimate the importance of what happens in the client, which IMO is where federation actually happens, as it’s there that platforms and UIs need to get stitched together.
It's obviously no reddit in size, very far from it, but it's by no means empty either.
The "threadiverse" is the current "growth" area of the fediverse IMO, especially if you include blogs like WP and Ghost. See eg: https://community.nodebb.org/post/99736
Getting involved and supporting that kind of platform on the fediverse is IMO a good idea. The fediverse needs more "community building" tools, and forums/reddits are good for that. Lemmy even has private sub-lemmies on the road map.
Slack have decided to start training AI on enterprise customer data, including DMs, private workspaces and files. You have to have admin opt out via email. HT @Quinnypig
If Google makes its money through contextual ads on search results pages now, in an AI-driven world it’ll make its money through sponsored answers (or just contextual ads related to the answers). The way sites will continue to get traffic is through buying ads.
"i use linux as my operating system," i state proudly to the unkempt, bearded man. he swivels around in his desk chair with a devilish gleam in his eyes, ready to mansplain with extreme precision.
"actually," he says with a grin, "linux is just the kernel. you use GNU+linux."
i don't miss a beat and reply with a smirk, "i use alpine, a distro that doesn't include the GNU coreutils, or any other GNU code. it's linux, but it's not GNU+linux."
the smile quickly drops from the man's face. his body begins convulsing and he foams at the mouth as he drop to the floor with a sickly thud. as he writhes around he screams "I-IT WAS COMPILED WITH GCC! THAT MEANS IT'S STILL GNU!"
coolly, i reply "if windows was compiled with gcc, would that make it GNU?" i interrupt his response with "and work is being made on the kernel to make it more compiler-agnostic. even if you were correct, you won't be for long."
with a sickly wheeze, the last of the man's life is ejected from his body. he lies on the floor, cold and limp. i've womansplained him to death.
I’ve been on a number instances/platforms now with limits ranging from 4,000-15,000, and AFAICT it’s basically never a problem. So long as the UI has an “expand” option for longer content, nothing is lost.
The fediverse won’t succeed at putting up a #Stackoverflow substitute and that’s a problem?
Just an impression: All the pieces seem to be there. But what’s required is a team, with devs, PMs and coordinators, dedicated to making a particular place in the #fediverse .
That’s resources and decently sized financial and organisational demands, especially to get a critical mass of users.
Is the fediverse up to that challenge? If not, is it an issue worth addressing?
Technically, we could very much have a federated SO like platform. The moderation work, depending on how much of that you want, could be onerous, but it’s technical viability is exactly why I wrote the post, as I get the feeling it won’t happen mainly because it’s require precisely the kind of resources that the fediverse struggles to muster though the end product would probably be generally desirable.
So this is the kind of thing I was targeting. That there may be a mismatch between what the fediverse is even willing to think of (here, a somewhat commercial or ads-revenue driven platform) and what plenty would be happy with as a way to get a good service or platform on the fediverse.
TL;DW We're starting to see early evidence of diminishing returns with our current AI architectures. If this is true, then eventually they start to improve in a logarithmic manner, making superintelligence (at least using our current architectures) impossible to achieve from a practical standpoint. The issue is that we need too much data on specific things for it to perform well on them all.
Yea, if true, it's basically the close on this hype curve.
Some would say "already!", but back around GPT1 or 2, IIRC, the returns seemed roughly linear and so something like GPT3 was vaguely foreseeable because, IIRC, the thinking was we weren't quite sure how good they'd get if they got bigger.