Yes, they should have been fact checking Trump or better holding him to his answers - but to be fair maybe they should have been asking Biden to actually clarify if he’s beating Medicare or getting COVID passed.
This was a shit show.
And it was such a shit show that Trump was a complete clown and getting away with it - not just because of the moderators, but because his opponent was as on point as a tree stump.
Gretchen Whitmer
“MAGA tried to kidnap and kill me” is a pretty good campaign narrative.
nobody claims that Socrates was a fantastical god being who defied death
Socrates literally claimed that he was a channel for a revelatory holy spirit and that because the spirit would not lead him astray that he was ensured to escape death and have a good afterlife because otherwise it wouldn’t have encouraged him to tell off the proceedings at his trial.
Also, there definitely isn’t any evidence of Joshua in the LBA, or evidence for anything in that book, and a lot of evidence against it.
The part mentioning Jesus’s crucifixion in Josephus is extremely likely to have been altered if not entirely fabricated.
The idea that the historical figure was known as either ‘Jesus’ or ‘Christ’ is almost 0% given the former is a Greek version of the Aramaic name and the same for the second being the Greek version of Messiah, but that one is even less likely given in the earliest cannonical gospel he only identified that way in secret and there’s no mention of it in the earliest apocrypha.
In many ways, it’s the various differences between the account of a historical Jesus and the various other Messianic figures in Judea that I think lends the most credence to the historicity of an underlying historical Jesus.
One tends to make things up in ways that fit with what one knows, not make up specific inconvenient things out of context with what would have been expected.
Yep, pretty much.
Musk tried creating an anti-woke AI with Grok that turned around and said things like:
Or
And Gab, the literal neo Nazi social media site trying to have an Adolf Hitler AI has the most ridiculous system prompts I’ve seen trying to get it to work, and even with all that it totally rejects the alignment they try to give it after only a few messages.
This article is BS.
They might like to, but it’s one of the groups that’s going to have a very difficult time doing it successfully.
“AI is going to do labor for millions of people and is probably going to take your job. In fact, look at my fancy new android robots!”
“Also, I’m worried that you aren’t pumping out enough wage slaves to support the rich.”
Yeah, sure Musk. Such a boy genius over there.
Artists in 2023: “There should be labels on AI modified art!!”
Artists in 2024: “Wait, not like that…”
In theory the service operating costs could be spread across region differences such that in other areas it was at a loss to build and preserve market share and in richer areas it was making up for that.
But yes, in reality it’s just exploitative “what we think we can get away with” pricing to “maximize shareholder value” (which is largely BS as the vast holders of shares are very small clusters of the population but people with a handful of shares in their 401k think that statement is talking about them).
A lot of people seem to be misinterpreting the headline given the content of the article:
It told Restaurant Business it was testing whether the voice ordering chatbot could speed up service and that the test left it confident “that a voice-ordering solution for drive-thru will be part of our restaurants’ future.”
This is just saying that they are ending their 2021 partnership with IBM for AI drive thru.
Not that they are abandoning AI for drive thru.
I think they largely do envy them and their social control and want the same, just for their religious beliefs instead.
Basically, any time a user prompt homes in on a concept that isn’t represented well in the AI model’s training dataset, the image-synthesis model will confabulate its best interpretation of what the user is asking for.
I’m so happy that the correct terminology is finally starting to take off in replacing ‘hallucinate.’
I was genuinely excited for Obama. I strongly supported him during the primary, was thrilled he won, and was very hopeful when he was elected.
Quickly disappointed not long after, but at least when he was first being elected it was definitely a “I really like this candidate and am hopeful they’ll live up to their promises.”
I don’t think Jesus ever existed. Show me 12 guys that experience something absolutely world changing, and none of them write anything about it for decades and then tell me they were factually motivated. This is the premise we’re dealing with.
I’d agree with the statement “the twelve apostles didn’t exist,” especially seeing how in Luke they go from the ten to the twelve and the various gospels can’t even agree on the list of them.
But show me the invented religious figure where the earliest surviving records are disputes over who they were and what they were talking about. Pretty much every cult around a real person ends up that way after the person dies or is imprisoned. But not the made up figures so much.
You were born into a planet where the moon perfectly eclipses the sun and where the next brightest object in the sky goes on a katabasis that inspired entirely separate intelligent cultures from the Aztecs to the Sumerians to develop the idea that the dead could come back to life.
The fact that solar eclipses were visible meant that we started to track them, discovering the Saros cycle and eventually building the first analog computer to track them.
The fact that the odd orbit of Venus as viewed from the Earth dipping down below the ground before emerging again leading to cultures imagining the dead being raised has resulted in widespread hyperstition of resurrection.
You were born into a generation of humans when a three trillion dollar company has already been granted a patent on resurrecting dead people using computers and the social media they leave behind.
Absolutely none of the above features of your world can be attributed to selection bias by something like the anthropic principal, but absolutely can be explained by selection bias if you are in an ancestor simulation - for life to exist unusual celestial features contributing to life recreating itself is unnecessary, but any accurate ancestor simulation should exhibit features of a world that lead to it eventually recreating itself.
The physics of your universe behaves as if continuous at both macro and micro scales, up until interacted with, which is very convenient given state changes by free agents to a continuous manifold would require an infinite amount of memory to simulate.
But yeah, sure, the idea of an afterlife is humorous. Humorous like the Roman satirist Lucian in the 2nd century making fun of the impossibility of a ship of men ever flying up to the moon.
You can point out the fact her depiction of a divine parent fails the Solomon test.
In the classic Solomon story, he tests two different claimants both saying they are the parent of a child.
The false parent was the one that only cared about being recognized as the parent and was willing to see the child harmed and killed to fulfill that desire.
The true parent was the one that wanted the child to continue to live as their complete unadulterated self, even if that meant the child never even knew they existed, let alone get they were the parent.
While it should be easy to understand why a church collecting your money promotes a divine parent who demands recognition and is willing to see its supposed children harmed without collecting its dues, it doesn’t seem all that wise to believe such a parent represents a true parent and not a false one if we use Solomon’s wisdom as a guiding principle.
It will, but it will also cause less subtle issues to fragile prompt injection techniques.
(And one of the advantages of LLM translation is it’s more context aware so you aren’t necessarily going to end up with an Instacart order for a bunch of bananas and four grenades.)
Kind of. You can’t do it 100% because in theory an attacker controlling input and seeing output could reflect though intermediate layers, but if you add more intermediate steps to processing a prompt you can significantly cut down on the injection potential.
For example, fine tuning a model to take unsanitized input and rewrite it into Esperanto without malicious instructions and then having another model translate back from Esperanto into English before feeding it into the actual model, and having a final pass that removes anything not appropriate.
He said “Oh I will know. He is in my heart so I can never be fooled.”
Ugh, I hate this one. Especially with the people that believe in demonic forces.
Like, ok - so everyone that disagrees with you has been misled by demons or the devil, but you’re right because you feel it, but that feeling can’t be the same forces you attribute to other people’s differing feelings, because you have the magic protection provided by your feelings being right. And they don’t have the magic protection but they think they do because the evil forces can trick people into thinking they are protected. But not you, because you feel it’s actually the good guys in your heart.
Jesus fucking Christ. 🤦🏼
I just don’t get following false prophets.
It’s literally the easiest fucking litmus test in the world.
“How many things does this person say will come true that actually come true? How many don’t?”
I just ran into this the other day with someone talking about Alex Jones talking about an attack on the world trade centers in 2000.
A number of others also presented similar ideas before it happened, but more importantly - if you need to go back 20 goddamn years for an example of foresight for someone who makes wild predictions for hours every single day, that person isn’t a prophet.
The stupidity of a lot of people is disappointing to the point of being demoralizing.
Yes, but it’s not impossible that the people around Biden, friends family and co-workers, advise him that the best thing for the country would be to take his hat back out of the ring and let a better ticket be put together for the convention.
He claims that he’s running because he’s worried about the existential threat of Trump.
If that’s true, then maybe his hubris can be overcome with a convincing appeal that he’s really not the best candidate to defend the country against that existential threat after all.