I want to have your children. In the nicest possible way.

I think I’m referring to something much more difficult. In most of the places I’ve worked, if your boss says that the plan is… actually they won’t call it a plan they’ll call it a strategic direction… that we will all flap our arms and fly to the moon and mine the green cheese that is there, it’s not ok, even as a moon expert, to reply that the moon isn’t made of green cheese. That would hurt your boss’s feelings. They won’t say “It hurts my feelings when you expose my ignorance”, they’ll just say you have a poor attitude, or that you don’t know how to communicate.

There are unwritten rules about how people need to restrict knowledge to themselves and those they trust in order to gain power. To these people, loyalty is more important than the truth, so in order to demonstrate that I am trustworthy, I have to at least appear to accept the green cheese strategic direction, even if I manage it by gradually using different words until the actual work that needs to be done is included in the strategic plan. To a neurotypical person this is just basic office politics and they just nod and say yes to their boss and work it out from there, but to us it hurts not to be able to speak the truth and discuss ideas openly.

There are certainly photoshop jobs of this image, but as far as I can tell, the black and white version with the sign saying ‘pon farr night fridays’ is the original. I’d like to know where the photo came from though.

…quotation marks… That’s enshittification at work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification A backwards step from… Alta Vista in 1996!!! https://jkorpela.fi/altavista/

I’m Australian. I read the title and immediately scanned the photo looking for the huntsman (spider).

Top o’ the mornin’ to ya. Clippy O’Pilot at yer service.

Is that her? She looks like a hallucination.

Enshittification. Every human who uses computers on a daily basis needs to understand this word.

Anything that starts with ‘aww’

If plastic surgery is based on people with good looks, it seems to be very loosely based on them!

“has a model of how words relate to each other, but does not have a model of the objects to which the words refer.

It engages in predictive logic, but cannot perform syllogistic logic - reasoning to a logical conclusion from a set of propositions that are assumed to be true”

Is this true of all current LLMs?

Thank you for replying. This is the level of info I used to love on Reddit and now love on Lemmy.

Thanks for your reply, I appreciate the correction and the info.

Interesting article.

“Instead of passing a law preventing civilians from carrying weapons of war, they enacted a rule prohibiting spectators from carrying small signs into meetings.”

“Americans, whether they own a gun or don’t, want guns kept out of the hands of dangerous and unstable people. Americans, whether they vote for Republicans or Democrats, don’t want children to be blasted into bits at their school desks. As we have lately learned here in Tennessee, that’s a lot of common ground.”

This is my complaint. It ranks popular videos with the title words out of order, over videos with the words in phrase order when I’ve used quote marks as a command to only return results containing the phrase.

I also assume that for both Google and YouTube, content they want me to see is being ranked above content I choose. I am the product, not the customer, and to me that’s not acceptable in a search engine.

The thing that strikes me about LLMs is that they have been created to chat. To converse. They’re partly influenced by Turing tests where the objective is to convince someone you’re human by keeping up a conversation. They weren’t designed to create meaningful content or factual content.

People still seem to want to use chat GPT to create something, and fix the accuracy as a second step. I say go back to the drawing board and create a tool that analyses statements and tries to create information based on trusted linked open data sources.

Discuss :)

I search Google for “Music behind the scenes”. Because the first word is music(?) Google gives me four songs with some of the keywords, but not in phrase order. Then it gives me seven YouTube videos, then one website that actually contains the phrase, and in fact refers to the videos I’m looking for.

But what it absolutely refused to give me, no matter how hard I tried, was this: https://youtu.be/7r01e_SZ5ic?si=GdOpoP8dBp372yjg

I presume this is because the videos aren’t monetised? Anyway precision score 11/30, and as for recall, even if I click on ‘videos’ the five of them that have the exact phrase in the title don’t appear at all.

Takeaway: “What’s the use of ranking high with content that doesn’t engage visitors? If they feel like a bot wrote the content, it defeats the purpose. If this is what it takes to rank on a search engine, then there’s something wrong with the search engine itself.”

True dat.

The customer is not always right. Sometimes the customer is a douchebag.

Ah, the corporate enshittification of search.