Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)A
Posts
12
Comments
700
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • In some cases I'd argue, as an engineer, that having no calculator makes students better at advanced math and problem solving. It forces you to work with the variables and understand how to do the derivation. You learn a lot more manipulating the ideal gas formula as variables and then plugging in numbers at the end, versus adding numbers to start with. You start to implicitly understand the direct and inverse relationships with variables.

    Plus, learning to directly use variables is very helpful for coding. And it makes problem solving much more of a focus. I once didn't have enough time left in an exam to come to a final numerical answer, so I instead wrote out exactly what steps I would take to get the answer -- which included doing some graphical solutions on a graphing calculator. I wrote how to use all the results, and I ended up with full credit for the question.

    To me, that is the ultimate goal of math and problem solving education. The student should be able to describe how to solve the problem even without the tools to find the exact answer.

  • That's a slippery slope fallacy. We can compensate the person with direct ownership without going through a chain of causality. We already do this when we buy goods and services.

    I think the key thing in what you're saying about AI is "fully open source... locally execute it on their own hardware". Because if that's the case, I actually don't have any issues with how it uses IP or copyright. If it's an open source and free to use model without any strings attached, I'm all for it using copyrighted material and ignoring IP restrictions.

    My issue is with how OpenAI and other companies do it. If you're going to sell a trained proprietary model, you don't get to ignore copyright. That model only exists because it used the labor and creativity of other people -- if the model is going to be sold, the people whose efforts went into it should get adequately compensated.

    In the end, what will generative AI be -- a free, open source tool, or a paid corporate product? That determines how copyrighted training material should be treated. Free and open source, it's like a library. It's a boon to the public. But paid and corporate, it's just making undeserved money.

    Funny enough, I think when we're aligned on the nature and monetization of the AI model, we're in agreement on copyright. Taking a picture of my turnips for yourself, or to create a larger creative project you sell? Sure. Taking a picture of my turnips to use in a corporation to churn out a product and charge for it? Give me my damn share.

  • Google doesn't sell the search engine as a product.

  • Not to mention, a lot of museums have no photography rules.

  • AI is the capitalist dream. Exploit the labor and creativity of others without paying them a cent.

  • They're someone else's turnips though, not yours. If you're going to make money selling pictures of them, don't you think the person who grew the turnips deserves a fair share of the proceeds?

    Or from another perspective, if the person who grew them requests payment in return for you to take pictures of them, and you don't want to pay it -- why don't you go find other turnips? Or grow your own?

    These LLMs are an end product of capitalism -- exploiting other people's labor and creativity without paying them so you can get rich.

  • I can't make money without using OpenAI's paid products for free.

    Checkmate motherfucker

  • Her number one issue currently is stopping an ongoing Genocide.

    What tangible steps has she taken to do so? If she's unable to take any because she doesn't hold an elected position, and she truly believes Democrats won't do anything, then her top priority to stopping the genocide should be winning any elected position. Her utter mismanagement of the Green party suggests that is nowhere near her goal.

  • You're still not addressing my main point that Stein is terrible for the Green party and indistinguishable from someone who's purposely trying to sabotage it.

  • That doesn't address my point. If the Greens were a serious party there would be a large movement to boot Stein for how ineffectual she's been as a leader.

    Say what you will about Democrats and Biden, but they are leagues ahead of Greens and Stein in this regard.

  • How would a Democrat/Republican plant who was purposely trying to sabotage the Greens and prevent them from gaining relevance act differently from Jill Stein?

    They wouldn't.

  • It's quite interesting how some people hate Democrat or Republican politicians repeatedly running for president, but will completely defend Stein for running several failed campaigns.

  • /s?

    Nukes are such a terrifying weapon that after being used, the world collectively shit its pants and said "maybe we've gone too far". Truman fired a general who suggested using nukes in the Korean War, and everyday military personnel stopped a misunderstanding from causing a nuclear exchange in the Cold War.

    Country X doing a shitty thing did not entitle countries A-Z to also do that shitty thing. If it was terrible of X to do it, it's terrible when anyone else does it, and they don't get a pass just because of how shitty X was.

    Edit: Oh my god you're serious. What the fuck.

  • ... Well. That was short lived.

  • Fighting oppression is a good act on its own, but it doesn’t need to be done by good people.

    Well said. I just like to differentiate between Hamas itself and the Palestinians freedom fighters, because there is a difference. At the end of the day though, maybe it isn't a distinction that matters a whole lot right now.

  • Oh I don't disagree there. I agree with pretty much everything you've said here actually. I was just saying that Hamas isn't some pure hearted rebellion group. But I do think they are the lesser evil.

  • Actually, surprisingly not badly. US generals like Milley took precautions to prevent Trump from doing even more disastrous things. Military leadership is generally respectable.

  • That isn't Hamas though. Their leadership lives it up in Bahrain I think and has a dictatorship over Gaza. Before the pandemic there was a protest by the Palestinians and it was brutally oppressed. Hamas hasn't held elections in a long time.

    Don't confuse Palestinian freedom fighters and civilians seeking revenge with Hamas.

  • I don't think they intentionally would, but indiscriminate bombing has the tendency to create unintentional deaths for everyone involved.