I don’t think a screwdriver would illuminate much at all. You are a bit crazy.

deleted by creator

The same nonsense is invading all of my feeds as well. These things need to be required to label their AI usage so they can be filtered out.

Poor thing was just a wood owl until you spotted it.

I enjoyed hearing about meme crossovers in a recurring Reply All segment where they would take a host who didn’t understand a complicated Tweet and break down all the pieces.

Here’s an excerpt that stuck with me:

PJ: Dog underscore rates. Ok. So, there is a–there is a Twitter account, uh, that has over 2 million followers.

ALEX BLUMBERG: Ok.

PJ: And it is devoted to rating peoples’ dogs,

ALEX BLUMBERG: Rating them.

PJ: Yeah. So like, scale of one to ten?

ALEX BLUMBERG: Ohhhh.

PJ: Except they always give them above 10. Like, every single time. Um, can I just show you the best moment in WeRateDogs™’ history? Where a guy got angry, that he thought the ratings system was skewed?

ALEX BLUMBERG: Uh, so, this guy Brant?

PJ: Yeah.

ALEX BLUMBERG: He was like, “@dog_rates You’re rating system sucks! Just change your name to cute dogs!” And then WeRateDogs™ wrote back: “Why are you so mad, Bront?” And then he said, “Well, you give every dog 11s and 12s, it doesn’t even make any sense!” (laughing) That’s a guy who is not in on the joke.

PJ: Yes.

ALEX BLUMBERG: (laughing) And then WeRateDogs™–and then WeRateDogs™ says, “They’re good dogs, Brent.” Brant: “It’s a cheap gimmick!” WeRateDogs™: “Well Brint, (laughing) the people love it and I’m doing it for them, not you.” Uh. Brent: “All I’m saying is you could have real legitimate ratings instead of every just saying (laughing) every dog is a 10, 11, or 12”

PJ: So like, that is basically–that is like a good encapsulation of what is good about this.

ALEX BLUMBERG: (laughing)

PJ: (laughing) Alex Blumberg is losing his mind.

ALEX BLUMBERG: Oh, “They’re good dogs, Brent” is really funny.

Here’s the episode: https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/o2ho9j

Miss that show.

Probably they find net zero (minus cost of hiring musicians) preferred over paying out a moderate income to actual artists. Capitalism at its finest.

chat j’ai pété

Ah, thanks for the correction, never done it myself and learned about it a long time ago so I’m not surprised I remembered it wrong.

Heavily featured in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwMwzGIt5ek

I have heard that spore prints are a reliable way of determining mushroom species (removing the stem, putting the underside of the mushroom on an ink pad, pressing against paper, and comparing the print with those of known species).

I bet an AI could analyze that data pretty well. But since there’s really no market for such a product, if I want it, I would have to make it myself. In which case I highly advise against using it because I really don’t trust me.

So these books are the reason I am the way I am?

When you’re here, you’re ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ʟᴇᴀᴠɪɴɢ.

Does it count if I give a proof reducing the entire universe down to a 2-dimensional construct?

Did some Googling. Apparently it’s nutritional supplements:

https://5percentnutrition.com/

This one:

https://lemmy.ml/post/16995334

I feel so lucky with my cat. Would never dream of scratching me. Loves belly rubs. Most affectionate one in my life. If I ever pet him the wrong way he lets me know by giving me the gentlest “bite” basically just touching his teeth to my hand. I don’t deserve him.

I still haven’t had it yet, but everyone around me has multiple times. So, my current working theory is I am a fully asymptomatic one-man superspreader.

Pretty flowers and closure. Two of my favorite things. Crazy that the AI could detect exactly what they were based on the original image. Thanks for following up!

You have very nice eyelids.

Agreed, it is super creepy to have the government know where you are at all times, even if the government weren’t corrupt. Most of us are tracked anyway because our phones are not private, but this is just another step down that slippery slope.

Another aspect of this is how inherently racist AI surveillance systems are. Facial recognition is trained on mostly white photos, so it’s great at telling white people apart. But due to a combination of lacking training data and difficulty picking up contrast with darker skin tones, it is far more likely for people of color to be falsely identified by AI software.

I used to work for a company that did facial recognition for various clients including the government. My friends and I all quit in protest when our employer started work on something they called a “deconfliction queue”. The idea was that faces from crime scenes which could not be identified would enter a queue where they would be saved for future comparison. Then, if the same face shows up as part of another crime scene, they would be matched and raised in priority. This is all well and good if it actually is the same person committing these crimes. In practice, we suspected that having a queue like this would lead to false positives where people (particularly of color) would be accused of committing multiple crimes just because they look similar to someone else. Or in the worst case scenario, an innocent person could register for a photo ID and suddenly get a no-knock warrant in the middle of the night because the deconfliction queue thinks their driver’s license looks a lot like a serial criminal.

Real Minority Report stuff we’re heading into, this shit’s probably going to get a lot more fucked before it gets better.