I love immediately unpacking. Makes me feel at home ^^ but I’m weird

Ich hatte die selbst Eindruck von Monstress. Sehr spannend (und so schön!) aber ich weiß nicht ob das wird gut gelöst. Aber schauen wir mal ;)

I teach, nothing is evident to anyone 😭

If you want, any work that does not encompass the whole world is applying a filter and therefore a bias of some sort. We don’t expect a photo to X-ray the roots of a tree, because we understand the physical constraints of photography. Sure, something could be just out of frame, something else could have been photoshopped out, you can create a different story by selecting different photos and so on. But we understand the “what” a photo represents. I doubt we have the dang understanding of “what” an LLM represents, what are the constraints of the possible answers, and we definitely don’t understand why a specific answer is chosen over the infinite other possibilities.

Depends. For an expert, that is self evident (even if it might not be clear which biases have been incorporated). But that is not how it has been marketed. Chatgpt and similar are perceived as answering “the truth” at all times, and that skews the user’s understanding of the answers. Researching how deeply the answers are affected by the coders’ bias is the focus of their research and a worthwhile undertaking to avoid overlooking something important

AI is getting a much more widespread use than people with a technical background. So its application, namely in education but in all other non-CS disciplines will be through people with limited understanding of the biases. It is importing them to make them explicit, to underline that an LLM will produce the same biases it deduced from testing data and its loss function. But lots functions and test data are not public knowledge, studies need to be performed to understand how the coders’ own biases influenced the LLM scheme itself.

A photo has less bias because we know what it is representing: a photo only shows what can be seen. But the same understanding is not clear AI. Why showing a photo-realistic tree versus a biological diagram? Choices have been made, of which a broader audience needs to be aware of.

Did you read the rest of the article? The tree drawing was just the triggering element to an evaluation of the AI capabilities, in particular underlining how “tree” (but also “human”, “success”, “importance”) are being strongly restricted in their meaning by the AI itself, without the user noticing it. Thus, a user receives an answer that has already undergone a filtering of sorts. Not being aware of this risks limiting our understanding of AI and increasing its damage.

Theoretical research in AI is both necessary and hard at the moment, with funding being giving more to new results over the understanding of the properties of old ones.

I am really impressed with your ability to break free of your educational mold. That’s an incredible achievement in itself. You were constantly in an environment glorifying war and war related activities, and you stiff alone against that. That’s awe inspiring.

I am but an internet stranger with a completely different life history and background, and i can bring small snippets of a different world to you.

An example: I have a clear memory of a defense contractor coming to my uni to give a talk, and asking my professor off he was interested in collaborating. Money was good and plentiful, but it was painfully clear that the research they wanted us to do could be used both for peace time and in very scary applications in war time. I was queasy about it, but my professor had been looking for funding left and right to keep our group going, so it seemed that was the golden ticket. Unexpectedly, instead of jumping on the opportunity, my prof send the contractor out of the room, and asked the group how we felt about it. Nobody really dared saying anything negative. Prof invited the contractor back to tell him we wouldn’t be participating. No excuses, just a pretty rough no to his face, never brought up the topic again.

People can and do turn down flowing cash when it clashes with their morality. You are not alone.

I am also very confused by the conditional. EU has safety standards because safety. Obviously lowering the standards lowers safety!

True, on the other hand US is often a canary indicator. Often, not always.

In general, I have heard many variations of “people don’t read anymore” soooo many times, I wonder why it’s still news. Yeah, people read less books, more blog posts, more stuff on the internet and so on. It has significant effects on long term information connection, creation and maintenance of neural patterns and so on. Either we restructure the internet or that’s how it’s going to go…

Oh so many!

What are you into? Which country (I am personally partial to Russia, France, Italy)? Translated into English? Classics or recent?

Thanks for the chuckle! Considering the health advise is specifically about two beers, saying a couple in context seemed confusing. Thus the quotation marks.

I’m a social drinker, so I’m more likely to drink “some” drinks once a week than a little every day. The latter is really not appealing!

I would like to know if, health wise, it’s the same to drink 2 drinks per day or four every second day (excluding the obvious short term effects)

Being the governing body means having responsibilities towards the population. They want to erase the population, obviously they don’t want to be in control when that happens!

The Trump presidency is eroding the international US standing at a pace that leave me speechless. He is shooting in the foot all the US historical allies and enemies alike. Even Europe is slowly distancing itself from US, that was unfathomable a decade ago.

They check if you can afford it “right now”, but the situation could change: a kid, an emergency, inflation, loosing your job, inflation… have i talked about inflation? Or the loan rates could change too

That assumes your means are constant and your spending isn’t, but this situation is the opposite: long term spending items (mortgage, car debt, significant inflation…) and means that dropped by losing jobs or pay raises that do not match inflation.

It seems to me that a lot of US people use credit cards to smoothen over larger purchases, so if you buy say a guitar for your hobby it doesn’t come all for this month’s budget but you plan to pay it off over multiple months. Often, credit card companies also encourage this behavior, giving short term low interest loans. But the overall market in the US is way more volatile than in Europe, so in the months you are paying off (your guitar, that fancy holiday, the tickets to a show…) you could lose your job, or the interests on your house mortgage could change significantly. And you are screwed.

Overall, Europeans tend to dislike credit unless it’s in the format of a mortgage, while it is a much more widespread form of payment in the US (and many other places). So, to most of your questions the answer is: most people have some credit card debt at all times.