Starmer's vision quest

[icowden]

It's not only reading things. It's remixing things. It's that which is the problem. I'm "banned" from that in general by law. Why should people be allowed to use AI to break laws and compete unfairly with humans?

It isn't though. It's regurgitating what it has learned. If I ask you what 3+3 is you will tell me 6. You learned that from someone else. There is a slight issue in that it has far better memory that humans therefore can often regurgitate sentences or paragraphs that are the same as someone elses. Most AIs now use attribution where they are quoting from sources to avoid the "plagiarism" argument.

If you want to lean pointillism you study Seurat. Would it then be a surprise if some of your paintings resemble Seurat's work?

 

[monkers]

It's not only reading things. It's remixing things. It's that which is the problem. I'm "banned" from that in general by law. Why should people be allowed to use AI to break laws and compete unfairly with humans?

Are you thinking about imaging of something else?

 

[mjr]

I was asked by another poster to post here what its response to the Dyson Calculation for them to see. I did so and posted that. Now you can criticise the AI reply to that all you like. I'm not responsible for its accuracy, and frankly I don't care, if it's is wrong then show where it is wrong if you care.

Yeah, right, you can pump out as much slop as you want and never have to show it's not slop. That's not how things work: if you post it as if it's accurate, then it's your reputation that gets trashed if you reposted lies.

And if you believe anything that AI has been telling you without checking it thoroughly, then you're a massive fool, and little better than someone who believes a politician without checking.

It's almost as if Google search is perfect. Inevitably anything that reads from the internet, whether human or bot is going to read a load of crap along with truthful text.

And the "intelligence" bit is being able to tell the difference, which is why these things now being mismarketed as AI aren't really intelligent. They're just a Large Language Model, capable of spewing out plausible-looking slop. It's more like if your search engine was trying to fool you, rather than give a list of possible resources - and actually isn't that what Google now does with AI above the actual query results?

Try understanding what I keep repeating as ''less crap'' and stop thinking that by that I mean ''outstanding''. Stand down.

I thought you didn't care how crap it is.

 

[monkers]

I thought you didn't care how crap it is.

What I mean is that I don't much care for what you think at the time that you are being insulting and a manbaby.

If instead you want to have the kind of discussion that I thought I was having with others; ie a comparison of the merits and demerits of using search engines and AI engines. This since this thread about Starmer's Visionquest has responded to one of his latest statements about his proposed use of AI to run public services.

As I stated I have real concerns about this.

It is not unreasonable for us to test different models of AI in a personal capacity to see where it is at.

On the basis of the comparison I made myself, and at the request of others I asked co-pilot for answers. There was some dissatisfaction with the answers it gave. This was not a disappointment to me, so I feel no need to defend it. One person scored it at 3/10. We have not fallen out over that because it's fine.

What is not OK is for you to ride in here on ya high horse making spurious allegations against me without foundation. You are just showing yourself as a typical troll-like keyboard warrior.

If you have your own concerns about any form of AI including Co-pilot then knock yourself out, and you'll hear no argument from me.

However, with you it's all personal. I'm not the architect of AI, nor Keir Starmer advocating its use. The speed of the thing should impress anyone, as its ability to write concise text in answer to questions, its ability to read and make some analysis. It is certainly not perfect, and it should not relied upon for indiscriminate use. The power concerns raised are certainly real and something that should concern us all.

By the way, I've done a bit of research today for other things, and I used Google search as usual, but that too often throws up some rubbish and tends to put sponsored content at the top of the list of answers, which being sponsored has the risk of being ''more crap''.

But along with the recent colloquialism, you think you can live rent free inside my head, while all the time insulting my intelligence.

Now take yourself in hand and get a grip on yourself.

 

[multitool]

AI is learning from the Internet. The Internet contains things which are not true.

 

[mjr]

[...] being insulting and a manbaby.

You may be posting moronic gibberish, but you can still do irony!

However, with you it's all personal.

Only if you think your posts are also you.

I'm not the architect of AI, nor Keir Starmer advocating its use. The speed of the thing should impress anyone, as its ability to write concise text in answer to questions, its ability to read and make some analysis. It is certainly not perfect, and it should not relied upon for indiscriminate use. [...]

Not just not perfect, but seriously wrong and untrustworthy. It hallucinates far too often.

By the way, I've done a bit of research today for other things, and I used Google search as usual, but that too often throws up some rubbish and tends to put sponsored content at the top of the list of answers, which being sponsored has the risk of being ''more crap''. [...]

Yeah, Google has lost the plot too. That doesn't make AI good, though.

Now take yourself in hand and get a grip on yourself.

No, I'll leave behaving like a touchy self-gratification artist to you. (OK, that one was getting personal...)

 

[BoldonLad]

True but is it the "saviour of aour failing economy" that it's being presented as?

Strange how day after bond interest hits high and £ a low (meaning worse austerity and/or tax rises) suddenly ... oh look at this shiny new thing that's going to create the growth we need so we can all live like kings.

Distraction intended to cause us to look away from the bad stuff.

Ian

How cynical 😊 but according to BBC News online, Reeves has Starmer’s “total confidence”, not usually a good place to be.

 

[monkers]

Yeah, Google has lost the plot too. That doesn't make AI good, though.

You really are quite a plank.

For the last time, and just for you, the sum of my comments on the subject is that I tried ChatGPT and called it utter crap. I tried Microsoft pilot and said it is less crappy. That's it, but once you have a bee in your bonnet you are capable of writing more bullshit than almost anybody else on the net.

But you keep posting away manbaby as if I am responsible for all the misinformation on the net and teaching it to all the bots. Sigh.

 

[Rusty Nails]

What I mean is that I don't much care for what you think at the time that you are being insulting and a manbaby.

If instead you want to have the kind of discussion that I thought I was having with others; ie a comparison of the merits and demerits of using search engines and AI engines. This since this thread about Starmer's Visionquest has responded to one of his latest statements about his proposed use of AI to run public services.

As I stated I have real concerns about this.

It is not unreasonable for us to test different models of AI in a personal capacity to see where it is at.

On the basis of the comparison I made myself, and at the request of others I asked co-pilot for answers. There was some dissatisfaction with the answers it gave. This was not a disappointment to me, so I feel no need to defend it. One person scored it at 3/10. We have not fallen out over that because it's fine.

What is not OK is for you to ride in here on ya high horse making spurious allegations against me without foundation. You are just showing yourself as a typical troll-like keyboard warrior.

If you have your own concerns about any form of AI including Co-pilot then knock yourself out, and you'll hear no argument from me.

However, with you it's all personal. I'm not the architect of AI, nor Keir Starmer advocating its use. The speed of the thing should impress anyone, as its ability to write concise text in answer to questions, its ability to read and make some analysis. It is certainly not perfect, and it should not relied upon for indiscriminate use. The power concerns raised are certainly real and something that should concern us all.

By the way, I've done a bit of research today for other things, and I used Google search as usual, but that too often throws up some rubbish and tends to put sponsored content at the top of the list of answers, which being sponsored has the risk of being ''more crap''.

But along with the recent colloquialism, you think you can live rent free inside my head, while all the time insulting my intelligence.

Now take yourself in hand and get a grip on yourself.

Whatever you do don't get him started on cycling helmets...or possibly start him off by asking Co-Pilot if helmets reduce the risk of injury.

 

[monkers]

Whatever you do don't get him started on cycling helmets...or possibly start him off by asking Co-Pilot if helmets reduce the risk of injury.

hahahahah ... do you double donkey dare me?

 

[Rusty Nails]

hahahahah ... do you double donkey dare me?

You know you want to.

 

[mjr]

You really are quite a plank.

Better a plank than a mug.

For the last time, and just for you, the sum of my comments on the subject is that I tried ChatGPT and called it utter crap. I tried Microsoft pilot and said it is less crappy. That's it, but

It seems like someone has forgotten that people can simply look back at past pages to see far more comments than that and they are now furiously backpedalling to try to get away from the BS posted.

 

[monkers]

fark it. Let's go for it.

''Co-pilot, is there evidence that the use of slip plane cycling helmets results in less brain injury than fixed plane helmets?''

Yes, there is evidence suggesting that slip plane cycling helmets, such as those with Multi-directional Impact Protection System (MIPS), can reduce the risk of brain injury compared to traditional fixed plane helmets. Studies have shown that helmets incorporating new technologies like MIPS, Shearing Pad INside (SPIN), WaveCel, and airbag helmets can significantly reduce peak rotational acceleration and velocity, as well as maximal strain in key brain regions during oblique impacts1.
For example, a study published in the Annals of Biomedical Engineering assessed the brain injury mitigation effects of various helmet technologies and found that most helmets with new technologies significantly reduced brain strain compared to conventional helmets.
Would you like more information on any specific helmet technology or study?

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10439-021-02785-0

 

[monkers]

Better a plank than a mug.

It seems like someone has forgotten that people can simply look back at past pages to see far more comments than that and they are now furiously backpedalling to try to get away from the BS posted.

Would you like me to ask Co-pilot if excessive gum flapping can result in injury? Wouldn't want you to hurt yourself.

 

[icowden]

AI is learning from the Internet. The Internet contains things which are not true.

Whilst this is true, I do remember being told as a child that if the wind changed, my face would stick like it. Also that if you swallow chewing gum it will take 7 years to digest and it could wrap itself around your intestines and kill you. I was told you can see the Great Wall of China from Space, that Napoleon was very short. And you can't start a sentence with a conjunction or split an infinitive. I was told that tongues have different zones for taste. I was told Newton discovered gravity when an apple fell on his head.

None of these things are true.

It turns out that learning from teachers and parents isn't all true either. Part of the AIs learning is to separate fact from fiction. It's very young at the moment.