It’s often not a choice between an AI-generated summary and a human-generated one, though. It’s a choice between an AI-generated summary and no summary.
Basically a deer with a human face. Despite probably being some sort of magical nature spirit, his interests are primarily in technology and politics and science fiction.
Spent many years on Reddit and then some time on kbin.social.
It’s often not a choice between an AI-generated summary and a human-generated one, though. It’s a choice between an AI-generated summary and no summary.
Could it perhaps be that online communities are in bubbles that focus primarily on his failures and downvote into oblivion any mention of successes he might have had?
…
No, it must be the money that’s wrong.
Some people are so addicted to anger that they’ll shoot themselves in the foot just so they’ll have something to complain about.
“The gimp” is a character from Pulp Fiction. You’re imagining things and refusing to use a powerful tool in response to that imagined slight.
Decay turns carbon into carbon dioxide, a gas. Unless it’s injected into deep geological structures it doesn’t stay underground.
Roots rot too. Otherwise the ground underneath forests would have hundreds of meters of accumulated root mass built up over the millennia.
No, by this logic one just needs to take into account how long is required before you consider something “sequestration.” Ocean sediment, for example, stays down there for hundreds of millions of years before subduction and vulcanism might bring the carbon back up. So it’s not permanent but it’s certainly permanent enough.
Trees last for a couple of decades. And once a forest is established they turn over continuously, so the forest as a whole emits as much carbon as it takes in. As we see here with the boreal forests in the article, the carbon comes back out into the atmosphere quite easily. I personally wouldn’t consider it a very good “sequestration” method.
If you really want to use trees for carbon sequestration, a good approach might be setting up big tree farms and then sinking the harvested wood into anoxic lakes. That’d take the carbon out of circulation for a long enough time that future generations can figure out what to do with it afterward.
Forests in general shouldn’t be seen as a way to “sequester” carbon, trees are just temporary storage for it. They’re nice to have, of course, and serve many benefits. But not that one.
Looking forward to the “Waymo robotaxis become silent killers stalking the night” headlines once the fix is implemented.
A surprise, to be sure. But a welcome one.
I run tabletop roleplaying adventures and LLMs have proven to be great “brainstorming buddies” when planning them out. I bounce ideas back and forth, flesh them out collaboratively, and have the LLM speak “in character” to give me ideas for what the NPCs would do.
They’re not quite up to running the adventure themselves yet, but it’s an awesome support tool.
Russia kidnapped a ton of Ukrainian children and distributed them throughout Russia. So Ukraine needs to occupy that territory to protect the Ukrainians living there, clearly.
It’s impossible to run an AI company “ethically” because “ethics” are such a wibbly-wobbly and subjective thing, and because there are people who simply wish to use it as a weapon on one side of a debate or the other. I’ve seen goalposts shift around quite a lot in arguments over “ethical” AI.
A surprising number of “file formats” these days are really just zip files with a standard for the filenames and folders contained within. There’s likely a ton of wonderful secrets like these to be found in the collective dataspace of humanity.
The Ukrainians are busy sinking ships in the Black Sea, I’d rather let them focus on that. So I’d rather see Putin send his stuff off to a remote theatre and then have it destroyed by others out there.
Oh thank goodness. Worst fear allayed, now on to the next one.
Yeah, maybe it’d be better if some politicians were working on this instead.
Whether it’s wanted or not is irrelevant. First past the post voting systems inherently move towards a two party system. If you don’t want a two-party system then you don’t want first-past-the-post voting.
Centrism is what gets large numbers of votes.
Obviously I hope that they’ll do well and make good decisions, but in a choice between a left-wing party that makes a principled stand but fails to secure power and a more centrist one that has more good ideas than bad on balance and does secure power to implement them I think the latter is preferable.
Things change. There was a period before this information was easily available; this repository only goes back to 2013. Now there’s a period after this information, too. Things start and eventually they end.
Here’s hoping that some neat new things start up in its place.