NoneOfUrBusiness

These still take actual industrial capacity to build; they’re not something you could build on your own even if you could afford to. I’d be more concerned about homemade bombs on drones.

I mean, making pipe bombs has never been particularly hard.

The idea that your body heat can be gone in 15 minutes is in and of itself insane to me coming from a hot desert region, but I guess at some point body heat generation just can’t keep up.

Oh my God so many layers.

This is where they grow politicians.

Good one.

May I rest in peace.

Okay pedantry incoming.

Yes and no. The problem here is that “colonize” refers to both economic colonialism (India, Malaysia+Singapore, etc) where you just extract resources from a region and settler colonialism (America, Australia, etc) where you actually export people to the colonized region in large numbers. Given the focus on actual British people, the joke works better with the latter, but there’s actually a lot fewer of those. Also, British settler colonies were usually so thoroughly colonized that there are barely any natives left to complain about it (not that there are none, but they’re an overwhelming minority in most cases). Ireland is thus unique as a country that Britain subjected to settler colonialism but where there’s a clear majority of natives who can quip about it. The only other example I can think of is New Zealand, and even then it only kind of works.

Conclusion: Ireland was the best country for that joke by far.

This goes to c\actuallyinfuriating.

This isn’t meant as a defense of OpenAI, just giving context because OP doesn’t. For what it’s worth I believe training AI on chat logs should be opt in rather than opt out, so OpenAI is clearly at fault here.

That’s definitely… an interpretation of things.

For the curious, the problem seems to be that the AI the mathematicians in question were using used their chat logs as training data, and therefore took the same approach they did when confronted with a similar problem.

That’s one thing it can do, but there are other, actually useful things you can have it do. For example I’ve used it as a pseudo-search engine when Google refused to cooperate/when the thing I was looking up was too complex before.

I mean you could say the same thing about the power loom. Labor-saving technology does matter.

The OP is basically the definition of a shit post, but also I don’t understand how “envy is bad” is toxic.

Yiu know what? Fair enough, I’m convinced.

It’s not; either politicians can tell teachers how to do their jobs or they can’t, and it’s hard to see how such precedent wouldn’t be abused by special interests, including AI companies.

This is _exactly _ what they’ve been asking for.

Uh… source?

Stop shilling for big tech, that’s loser ass baby shit.

I haven’t shilled for anything, so spare me the juvenile insults.

Do you trust the average teacher less than the average politician?

First thanks for writing a reply that actually engages with what I said.

Educators are already asking for restrictions on AI in the classroom.

Then why can’t they impose it themselves?

From all the reporting, it sounds like the mayor’s office is working closely with educators, parents, and students on how to best incorporate technology in the classroom.

Got anything I can read about this? Admittedly I haven’t looked very hard, but no reporting I’ve seen goes into that kind of detail.

Then it should be the teachers forbidding (or not) these tools as they see fit. My point is simple: Politicians shouldn’t be micromanaging classrooms. I don’t see AI having a positive effect on classrooms either, but I’m not about to go tell experienced professionals how to do their jobs without a damn good reason. For an example of what could go wrong, well with AI banned until highschool you lose the ability to have AI literacy classes, resulting in kids completely unprepared for dealing with a technology that isn’t going away anytime soon.