No, there’s an actual paper where that term originated that goes into great deal explaining what it means and what it applies to. It answers those questions and addresses potential objections people might respond with.
There’s no need for–and, frankly, nothing interesting about–“but, what is truth, really?” vibes-based takes on the term.
He’s decided you’re not on his level, but he thinks you’re cool all the same.
Of course, in this case, the older folks are talking with AI characters who are not real.
Pitching talking to nonexistent people as a fix for dementia, as opposed to the problem you’re trying to solve, is, uh, innovative. Among other things.
As a complimentary service, it is accessible to anyone with a landline or mobile phone and bridges the technological divide by not requiring an internet connection or even a computer. Critically, this promotes equitable access to cutting-edge technology that can benefit older Americans.
Kind of seems like actually providing the things people can’t readily access would be more valuable than lotus-eating-as-a-service, but I guess that’s why I’m not pulling down big VC bucks.
For concerned family members and friends, the service can call individuals on certain days and times to check in on them and provide telephone-based companionship.
“concerned”
The company has 60 people.
Who could actually talk to the older Americans in question, but are instead tasked with simulating conversations for them instead.
Look, I’m not going to pretend I call my relatives as often as I ought to. But I truly cannot imagine being one of those 60 people. I can’t put myself in the mindset of someone who would want this job, who would want this effort to have been a part of their life and career.
I laughed at first, but then I realized I’d have found Starfield vastly more interesting if weird stuff like this happened all the time on purpose and they leaned into it with small quests. This one bug delighted me more than any of the actual quests I can remember at this point.
It almost feels like Starfield was ambitious in the wrong ways. Bethesda trying to aim for Disco Elysium-ish oddness might not have turned out great, but I think it would have made more of a lasting impression.
Biblically-accurate Ace Combat aircraft.
A turret toss does seem like it would be effective as reactive armor. Is this how tanks evolve to survive drone predation? Main turret autotomy to give the smaller turret buds a chance to flee?
The microwave thing? I couldn’t even guess, though I personally wouldn’t want to stand next to it even if it works. A big microwave emitter on the battlefield is just asking to catch a HARM.
It really doesn’t seem like anyone knows for sure what to do about drones right now.
Large, non-nuclear EMPs mostly use explosives. Covering a large battlefield means you’re essentially bringing a massive, single-use explosive charge to the battlefield, staying uncomfortably close enough to benefit from it, and trying to set it off at exactly the right time, because they’re not reloadable. And your enemy is probably thrilled you’re doing this, because it saves them from hauling their own explosives there. (On that note, why are you sitting on this thing instead of dropping it on the enemy?)
This is in addition to whatever shielding you brought, which is likely bulky and conspicuous. And you’re probably not doing combined arms, because shielding infantry and light vehicles from massive explosions is, it is fair to say, something of an unsolved problem.
But wait, you might be thinking. I know there are non-explosive ways to generate EMPs. Yes, there are, but you need a power source for those, and if you have a really good, portable one of those and a consistent supply of fuel to run it, you probably have better uses for it, like powering a modest laser. Oh, also, you’re 100% sure your shielding works perfectly, right? You’ll find out quick if you don’t.
Environmentalists are fond of saying that “There is no second Earth“. They are wrong! Here’s why:
There is an entire second Earth right here on Earth.
Second Earth is a waterworld. It’s the vast Pacific Ocean that covers half the planet.
Well, he’s a little fuzzy on the concepts of halves and wholes, but let’s hear him out on colossal geoengineering projects.
Nobody:
Absolutely nobody:
The ghost of Sam Hughes: Okay but have you considered
[The AI]’s going to fall in love with you
Fortunately for everyone, they went out of business before a mandatory reporter had to make the weirdest call ever to CPS.
Ah, right, I guess that’s why other vending machines never caught on. Why spend $2 on a Snickers at work when a quick trip to the grocery store can get you candy for way less?
What you’re overlooking this time is vending machines sell convenience, not just single-serving portions. The fact that very few customers really need ammo without leaving the store/mall is indeed why this is a questionable business model and not just a sketchy one.
I’m puzzled, though, by the belief that hunters are more likely to make overpriced, impulse purchases of ammo than mass shooters. I’m even less inclined to buy that than ammo from a vending machine.
You’re forgetting mass shooters, i.e., the people who don’t care if they’re identified or if they’re getting a good price. Safe to say they’re not worried about their credit rating if the plan is to take on a SWAT team in 20 minutes.
Is it actually good against tanks now? I always liked it, but it still hurt to finally get a shot off just for the tank to shrug off the hit.
American Rounds
What, was the Circus of Values brand too expensive to license?
Oh, hey, I’ve run into this in the wild–the Kalendar AI people keep ineptly trying to start a conversation to sell some kind of kiosk software by referencing factoids they scraped from our latest press release. They’ve clearly spent more effort on evading spam filters and rotating domains than they have on anything else, but they helpfully use “human” names ending in “Kai,” so creating a wildcard filter wasn’t too hard.
Credit where it’s due: I’d never heard of Kalendar or the software company who hired them, but this experience has told me everything I need to know about both of them. If you don’t sweat the details and rate sentiment change using absolute value, that’s kind of impressive.
Addressing the “in hell” response that made headlines at Sundance, Rohrer said the statement came after 85 back-and-forth exchanges in which Angel and the AI discussed long hours working in the “treatment center,” working with “mostly addicts.”
We know 85 is the upper bound, but I wonder what Rohrer would consider the minimum number of “exchanges” acceptable for telling someone their loved one is in hell? Like, is 20 in “Hey, not cool” territory, but it’s all good once you get to 50? 40?
Rohrer says that when Angel asked if Cameroun was working or haunting the treatment center in heaven, the AI responded, “Nope, in hell.”
“They had already fully established that he wasn’t in heaven,” Rohrer said.
Always a good sign when your best defense of the horrible thing your chatbot says is that it’s in context.
I’m just going to pretend that’s one of the researchers from Where Oaken Hearts Do Gather.
I conclude that scheming is a disturbingly plausible outcome of using baseline machine learning methods to train goal-directed AIs sophisticated enough to scheme (my subjective probability on such an outcome, given these conditions, is ~25%).
Out: vibes and guesswork
In: “subjective probability”
See also Brigador: apart from the various lasers, exotic ballistics, and nightmarish chemical weapons it includes, there’s also the prosaic “Mãe Dois.” The tech entry leaves no doubt about what it is:
My understanding is that this weapon not only predates the colonies, but space travel entirely. If that is the case then it’s a truly venerable design, and one I’m told will continue to serve for the foreseeable future.