Nick
banner
nwbvt.bsky.social
Nick
@nwbvt.bsky.social
75 followers 49 following 3.3K posts
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
You're right, CBP only offers $30k as a signing bonus, my bad.
Yes but these aren't professionals, these are stormtroopers who took the job to get their $50k signing bonus.
And I don't recall you offering any references other than a screenshot from the very AI you were arguing doesn't actually know anything. So it's pretty rich for you to be demanding them from me.
Get a degree in computer science, specialize in deep learning, and then research modern agentic systems.

I'm sorry but I can't condense decades of knowledge into a few kinks. My day job involves building AIs. I know what I'm talking about.
Is that thinking? Well is a submarine moving through the water swimming? These semantic debates aren't all that interesting. Call it whatever you want, but it's not nothing more than a text predictor.
Second, it's not just returning a probable continuation of the text you input. It iterates over it several times, potentially making calls to external tools and consulting references it has available.
First the chatbot is not using that LLM trained on just predicting text. It's using one that is fine tuned to it's specific task.
You are conflating LLMs with AIs.

LLMs are the foundation of most modern AIs. And the base pre-trained models don't do anything more than predict text.

But those aren't what you are using when you use a chatbot like Chat-GPT.
So I don't know anything about the exact case you are talking about, but if all she did was talk about suicide with someone, no she should not have been convicted of manslaughter.
Like if I were suicidal (I'm not!) I wouldn't bring it up with friends and family because if I decided to go through with it (again, I'm not suicidal and wouldn't go through with it) they would try to stop me.

But with the AI I could just delete my chat history and it would forget completely!
I think the bigger question isn't "how can we engineer AIs to respond to suicidal users like actual people would" but "why are suicidal people more comfortable talking to AIs rather than actual people".
Also Kamala Harris did not win in 2020. Joe Biden did. Her primary campaign underperformed and she (like most VPs) wasn't particularly important in the general election.
The argument I made above was that the economy is the most important factor for most voters. Yes, there is not much that campaign positions and rhetoric can do if you govern poorly, but I did not drop any mentions to them, I just couldn't fit them in that one reply.
Also be more on point about their criticisms of Trump's disastrous tariff plans. Kamala just said "intends to enact what, in effect, is a national sales tax" because people might not know what tariffs are. But that resulted in people being confused and doubting her.
Well yes, at the very end of the campaign, after years of claiming inflation wasn't a thing, or that it didn't matter than inflation was high if unemployment was low, Kamala turned to a nonsensical argument that groceries were expensive because of corporate greed. But that was too little too late.
Yes, these election victories were due to a focus on economic factors.

I'm other words, exactly what the authors of all those postmortems everyone on Bluesky hate recommended.
I would be very careful about applying victories in blue electorates like Virginia, New Jersey, and New York City to the general population. And the Georgia wins were very specifically focused on the economy, not social issues.
The Supreme Court doesn't get elected. They serve life terms. The arguments the plaintiffs are making are traditional conservative arguments.
Is it surprising? He's a fan of the nondelegation doctrine.
What are you talking about, they got their own state in that election.
What's your opinion on the Town of Cary, NC Town council at large race?
She was definitely right about Edwards.
Yeah but it's a little easier to move to New Jersey than it is to immigrate to Canada.
And a fucking king!