That’s a good point. There is at least as much to learn from Antarctica as from Mars. Maybe less maybe more, but certainly more relevant since it’s on Earth. Plus easier to get to than Mars. Yet we can’t scrounge up enough to keep a larger presence there.
Sometimes I can’t shake the feeling that we are living in another dark age. We need a real renaissance to shake it.
Article doesn’t explicitly state this but it is very likely this would need to be trained extensively on each individual brain. So there would almost certainly be an explicit opt in.
Edit: didn’t watch the video. No thanks YouTube.
Teleportation, because the only upside to invisibility is subterfuge. Not that I am some saint who denies ever wanting that, it just seems like teleportation would be just as good at any use case invisibility has. It would also have lots of very life changing above board benefits too.
The US Navy has probably around 100 nuclear powered vessels, both submarines and Nimitz class carriers. Each of those have miniature nuclear plants on them.
I know their use cases are different but small and portable is small and portable. Virginia class subs typically stayed within cost budgets, but newer V blocks saw cost overruns, as well as the Gerald Ford carrier, which was about 3 billion over budget if I remember.
Not sure if overruns were due to being nuclear or because of other reasons. They are high tech military items that aren’t exactly mass produced, so lots of ways to overrun. However they are more mass produced than nuclear power stations in the civilian sector. Maybe some lessons can be learned.
Edit: Also forgot an important point that modularization was a key design point of the Virginia sub.
Or just pick the first option, which is basically what this article is saying. I don’t want it running all the time.
If you use google images to do basically the same searches you get the same diversity issues. It’s reflecting the training data, and the larger world by extension. Whatever they would have us do to fix that must be applied to reality before it can or should be artificially skewed in AI models. Because if you bias the model to compensate you will create a worse bias. One that was intentional.
Even if you don’t agree with that take, have a look at the Firefly example. they asked for a trucker named Paul, and they got a woman in the result set. Maybe somewhere out there exists a woman trucker named Paul, but it’s a clear reduction in accuracy and quality because Adobe attempted to inject artificial diversity.
You made me think of that xkcd about standards.
Anyway, the eurocentrism argument, while perhaps true due to the Latin root, seems to be a little bit of a savior complex don’t you think? China itself pushed for Esperanto to be used as a business language internally late last century as I recall.
Even if that politician called me personally I would feel this way. This is a statement about robocalls more than about AI.
However if they had a ChatGPT style interface for asking them in depth policy questions that would answer as they would answer, I would be all fucking in. That would be awesome.
Celebrating the fifth anniversary of this post.
Driverless cars will have an impossible standard to live up to. California has 48.5 injuries per 100 million miles driven (and 1.4 deaths). Unless that is zero with driverless cars, then the public will see an unreasonable risk. Any single accident gets tons of press… I found it very difficult to find an objective injury rate for driverless cars. Probably because there are five levels of automation, and many of them allow human error to come into play. Also they are self reported by the driver companies.
Electrical tape is classier.
I am both shocked and pleased that Ford did not make this list. Seriously, the brand with the most sold pickup truck doesn’t make a list for just about everything?