In America, you can’t open a bank account without an address. That means that the homeless population can’t open a bank account (not easily, anyway), and therefore can’t get a debit card.

Cashless is a nice idea, but it is extremely prohibitive against the most vulnerable people (which, sadly, might be part of the point).

I think the headline writer got confused about all the zeroes

How did I know Elon was attached to this before I even clicked the article?

He said $30,000 for the cybertruck too. $30,000 just seems to be his “I don’t really know the price” price.

With this movie, Am I Racist?, and Reagan all playing at the same time, the GOP is really going full-throttle in attempting to exploit their base.

First of all, you make a great point.

Second of all, that quote made me laugh out loud. “In 15 words”? Why is that even there? I saw Sam sitting there with Word open, cursor blinking at the end of his sentence about how deep learning worked, wondering how to make it more impactful. So he copies the sentence and pastes it into a chatgpt box and asks, “how can I make this hit differently?” and chatgpt, in all it’s gptness, responds: “try counting the number of words in the sentence and throwing that in front.”

In the post OP linked from Teixeira, he claims they terminated his employment.

Not sure about the artist, but these are characters from the game Persona 5 (Haru and Futaba)

What?

Cool. If OpenAI gets a pass, then piracy should be legal, right? I mean what good is a trademark or copyright law?

Edit: “I can’t make money without stealing other people’s work” is definitely a take

Here’s the conflict a to b: https://fortune.com/2024/08/15/elon-musk-tesla-stock-sale-twitter-x-advertiser-boycott-finances-bradford-ferguson/

archive link

IANAL, but I don’t think T&Cs are really legally binding and can be easily fought against in court.

This might just be my computer-focused life talking

I’m a software eng too, but I have broad interests. Like I said, the philosophic use doesn’t really have a place in this discussion and I messed up by bringing it in. The only way it would be relevant is if the universe is a simulation because, as you guessed, then free will itself becomes part of the equation.

I also don’t know why predictability would be solely based on the numbers that came before

There’s a miscommunication happening here, and I’m wondering if I’m not explaining myself well. Election predictions use polling as their dataset, and there are no calculations that really go into predicting the results other than comparing the numbers within those sets. That’s why they’re notoriously garbage (every single pollster had Hillary winning in late October 2016, for example). Also, there aren’t any calculations that go into a CEO/Boardroom’s intuitions on how shareholders will react to policy changes, so I’m not sure about the relevance here. In the case of pi, there is no dataset that you can use that tells you what the next unknown number in pi is. The only way to get that number is to run a very complex calculation. Calculations are not predictions.

As I said, you can’t predict the next number simply based upon the set of numbers that came before. You have to calculate it, and that calculation can be so complex that it takes insane amounts of energy to do it.

Also, I think I was thinking of the philisophical definition of “deterministic” when I was using it earlier. That doesn’t really apply to pi… unless we really do live in a simulation.

There’s no way to predict what the next unsolved pi digit will be just by looking at what came before it. It’s neither predictable nor deterministic. The very existence of calculations to get the next digit supports that.

Note: I’m not saying Pi is random. Again, the calculations support the general non-randomness of it. It is possible to be unpredictable, undeterministic, and completely logical.

Note Note: I don’t know everything. For all I know, we’re in a simulation and we’ll eventually hit the floating point limit of pi and underflow the universe. I just wanted to point out that your example doesn’t quite fit with pi.

Yeah, but your number doesn’t fit pi. It may not have a pattern, but it’s predictable and deterministic.

deleted by creator

It’s a paraphrased quote from Richard Feynman

If you can’t explain a difficult concept in a simple way, then you don’t truly understand it.

Toddler is missing a finger.

Maybe AI thinks humans would be better off as a species if we didn’t have 5 fingers