It will only work if the Democrats put up a bad candidate. A good candidate with good policies can defeat billionaire money, like in NY or WI, but a bad candidate with bad policies, like Kamala Harris, can easily waste a billion dollars.
I had the same problem. I had to manually give permission to Rufin to access my music folder. I used the 84 point answer here to help figure it out.
Incidentally, after some messing around, I think I’ll stick with Strawberry cuz I’m a weirdo who likes rating my music out of 5 stars.
Really wish he’d stop affecting other people with his mental health issues and just pop pills in private.
You were kinda correct. Trump becoming the big Republican nominee was part of the Pied Piper strategy of the establishment Democrat party. The Hillary Clinton campaign intentionally uplifted radical conservative candidates in an effort to make winning elections easier. The logic was if the Conservative party looks crazy, the Democratic party can run on simply pointing out that craziness without needing to actually have specific policies or positions. The establishment Democrats loved the idea of doing less work, so they eagerly adopted the strategy and focused on crushing their own left flank candidate Bernie Sanders.
The Clinton campaign and the DNC had done a bunch of oppositional research on Donald Trump in preparation, but chose to sit on it, not wanting to tank Trump’s chances of becoming the nominee. They focused instead on Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio.
This is why the US has a bunch of feckless Democrats who never seem to run for anything, only against Republicans. They keep running this same, “vote for me or you’ll get the crazy man” strategy, even though they keep losing with it.
Famously, this Fox News host got to know his much younger wife while she was a producer at Fox by letting the air out of her car tires and then offering her a ride home. He was married at the time. I say famously because he likes to tell this story during his nationally viewed show as if it were a meet-cute.
It’s not surprising he would be comfortable publicly joking about mass rape.
If you feed a chatbot the sentences, “Bananas are a good source of potassium. Bananas are not a good source of protein.” There is a good chance it will spit out the phrase, “Bananas are a good source of protein.” because the phrase “good source of protein” is in the original data it was fed. There will always be a significant chance of spitting out this phrase.
No matter how much you improve the AI, because it uses probabilistic generation, it will always be cobbling together sentences without any regard for what the overall sentence means. An intern will eventually learn case law, an AI agent will never be trustworthy. When you ask an AI agent a question, it will always lie to you about being certain of its answer because its answer is built upon a roll of the dice.
And I’m saying that lying is inherent to the technology. Generative AI uses probability to generate output. It’s constantly rolling dice when determining output. Any data fed into it is used to calculate odds on what words should follow other words.
It’s like making a smoothie and then trying to consume specific vitamins. No matter how good your smoothie making machine is, that’s gonna be an impossible task because blending everything together is inherent to making a smoothie. You’d be much better served just eating individual bananas to get your potassium intake.
Asking a chatbot to stop lying is about as useful as asking a river to stop flowing. It won’t happen unless you do it yourself.
The more we criticise muppets, the more they will take notes and improve. And before we know it, we won’t be able to tell if a movie is human acted or muppet acted.
Shilling for data centers puts you on the same dumbass level as Kevin O’Leary and Peter Thiel who spout bullshit like “the Pope is serving the Chinese communist agenda for doubting AI”.
The kind of public speaking Thiel does is not aimed towards regular people. For example, the event highlighted in the article, The Aspen Ideas Festival, costs $3,000 a person for 6 days. He’s speaking to the rich and wealthy who take his absurd ideas seriously because their wealth makes them out of touch with the rest of society. These events carry big price tags to exclude people like you and me from knowing what they are talking about, what kind of agendas the Epstein Class is trying to advance. Ignoring him and his ilk does not lessen his power because the source of his power are the rich and wealthy. Theil does not derive his power from people, but from wealth.
This means that the method of removing his power requires actively casting him down from his tower. Regular people need to pool their power together and remove his influence through collective action, like using government to jail him. This is only possible through actively acknowledging the threat people like Thiel present. We cannot safely ignore people like Thiel anymore you could ignore your neighbor building a rocket launcher pointed at your bedroom.
I realize that the idea of using government to punish evil rich people seems unrealistic, what with the myriad examples of Epstein’s friends avoiding punishment. But just because it seems impossible right now doesn’t actually make it impossible. It will require a lot of people coming together to make decisions about a better future, which first requires people becoming more politically active. Part of that requires education, explaining why people should become more politically active, and I think and important part of that is highlighting how certain people in positions of power need to be actively fought against. You and I do not need further evidence that Peter Thiel is a bad person, but there are people out there who don’t know what Thiel is doing in the background so stuff like having multiple news outlets report on his evil and absurdity can help raise awareness. Though I will grant that perhaps it’s less useful on a platform like Lemmy in which a majority of the userbase is already more politically aware than the average person.
Also, I don’t think that you and I are fighting each other or that we are in hostile opposition in this discussion. We both have the same goal of removing power from people like Thiel, we just disagree about how to enact that goal. I think this kind of discussion is useful amongst allies and doesn’t necessarily need to result in a political schism or anything.
I think an article titled, “Peter Thiel in Aspen: The pope is ‘working for the Chinese Communists’” is pretty absurd and not supportive or amplifying. Theil is not a social media influencer who gains power from spreading his ideas amongst regular people. He gains power by speaking to rich fail sons and people already in positions of power. The less he is perceived by regular working class people, the better he can spread his message amongst the Epstein Class.
The strategy of deplatforming works on people trying to spread their message to a wide crowd, like Nick Fuentes or Alex Tate. Theil is not someone who wants his message spread widely. He is targeting the already rich and powerful.
Give him a stage? Peter Theil already has a stage. He has the ear of the president. He already has power and influence. Ignoring him lets him continue to grow that power and influence unopposed. He does not get power and influence from people knowing who he is; he gets it from being able to work behind the scenes in the darkness.
Unlike your ceazy neighbor, Peter Theil can influence the direction of the US government. He’s the reason why Vance is VP. Ignoring him just lets him continue advancing his agenda unchecked. Mentioning stuff like this helps explain why people like Theil should be cast down from their positions of power. That’s also important because not many people know why Theil is a bad person.
Mamdani ran on rent, buses, and childcare. These seem like policies that would appeal to people in Texas.
The better part of a decade, all the resources in the world, and you expect me to be impressed with something that can’t perfectly do an entry level programming project? With that kind of resource usage, I expect a moon landing at the very least.
There is no use case for chat boxes. Uber was losing money, but it was driving people to places. Amazon was losing money, but it was delivering books to people. Chat boxes don’t do shit.
Uber would have failed if their cars just drove in circles. Amazon would have failed if they didn’t deliver anything. There is no real use case for this tech, just like with scam coins or monkey pictures, this is tech searching for a problem to solve.
The most foundational aspect of business is that you gotta do something to get money. What exactly have these chat boxes produced? Shitty porn and incorrect advice. If that’s the best they’ve got after consuming the entirety of human knowledge and guzzling an ocean of freshwater, this shit ain’t going nowhere.
We do this in the US public education system; it’s called Tracking. Although it’s become a little less popular, much of the 20th century had three tracks, Vocational, General, and Academic. We still have the echoes of this system today with stuff like “Auto Academy” or “College Prep” in US highschools that offer students different classes based on what group they are in. Counselors and advisors tell students what kind of track they are suited for based upon test scores and teacher observations and will discourage students from classes they are “unsuited” for.
Maybe you saw this in your own schooling? A group of students who all had the same classes all day because they were in the “Finance Academy” or something? A friend whose advisor told them Pre-cal was a waste of time for them, despite being interested? It is systemic and points kids towards futures they may be unsatisfied with all because the economy could really use more programmers or pharmacists or whatever right now.
I definitely agree that many countries’ approach to education creates mercenary thinking. I’m also saying that the education system presented in this article has that same kind of focus.
The article mentions Amelie who was told at 10 to join one track and as a result, spent the better part of a decade learning stuff she didn’t want to. I don’t doubt that she learned some stuff she found interesting and some stuff that makes for a well rounded person, but she was told to go looking in a certain direction by adults who judged her aptitude for labor at the age of 10.
I’m glad the system caught her and she eventually found a field she is interested in, but I would argue that the classification and systemic narrowing of education did Amelie more harm than good. Those textile and blacksmithing classes that Amelie was exposed to are an awesome opportunity for a student interested in those fields, but that really should be up to the student. They should be free to take those kinds of vocational training classes alongside more traditionally academic classes.
The businessmen in China know they will be shot by the government if they are too exploitative.