Though the image generators are actually good. The visual arts will never be the same after this

“Built to do my art and writing so I can do my laundry and dishes” – Embodied agents is where the real value is. The chatbots are just fancy tech demos that folks started selling because people were buying.

Unpopular opinion: It’s OK to use AI to fight fraud as long as your data is good, your precision threshold is very high, and appeals are easy. It seems like it is almost never used in this way when people try to save money, sadly.

deleted by creator

Not in NYC. Spectrum is my only option and they are flaky as hell

LLMs can be traced back to steady, incremental progress from an initial approach explored in the '70s. Cryptocurrency isn’t technology itself, but an application of the concept of distributed consensus (pioneered with PAXOS in the 80s), just like chatbots are applications of AI. I’m much more optimistic about AI and distributed consensus than cryptocurrency and chatbots, if I’m making sense.

This whole populism trend is concerning to me. I agree that some folks are more responsible than others for the problems we face today. Even so, singling out and blaming a small group of people for the problems we face, then punishing them with legislation, is not the most productive way forward. We need real, serious solutions. “Get rid of X” rarely, if ever, works.

A non prime number of times… It looks like the string of characters could repeat number of times because the whole capture group repeats. I don’t see a prime constraint.

Think a bit before you talk. Hard for all of us!

I would have interpreted this the same way as the AI did FWIW. Then again, I don’t do frontend stuff, and I run when I see TypeScript in my hobby projects because it’s such a pain.

Not likely. The research folks were highly skeptical of crypto from the start, but not the latest AI advances. The AI is a fundamental technology that was developed by the scientific method and can be empirically examined right now. Crypto is an application of 1980s technology with the hope that it will gain momentum as a currency with enough marketing.

This article is annoyingly one-sided. The tool performs an act of synthesis just like an art student looking at a bunch of art might. Sure, like an art student, it could copy someone’s style or even an exact image if asked (though those asking may be better served by torrent sites). But that’s not how most people use these tools. People create novel things with these tools and should be protected under the law.

But why?

I bet its two users are both very sad

Good to have a reality check, but this is still better than what we had before

GNOME sucks, both in their community engagement culture, and actual look. I’ve never liked their culture, but they used to have a superior desktop IMO.