This is bloody hilarious 🤣

It sounds really cool, but I’ve honestly had issues installing it on two PCs now on two separate occasions separated by a couple months. Issues I didn’t have installing Ubuntu. The installer would fail to complete. I’m not a Linux power user, and while I tried debugging for a few hours, I gave up.

Tbh the grail for me would be if it could execute code in a persistent, local, virtualized environment. I’m sure that sort of product will come to Windows, but it can’t come soon enough for me.

I am unimpressed with copilot on Windows 11. Privacy aside, It seems like a web wrapper for Bing ai, which is a performant chat bot, but isn’t anything special when you compare it to openai’s data analytics ai.

It wasn’t able to update PC settings or files, for example. Though, I only had 15 min with it.

Your situation sounds like it has some red flags. It might be worth asking Lemmy specifically for advice on that and get an outside opinion.

As for the question? My parents own a house. I’d make it a home for my few friends who can’t afford one and move on in.

No.

For 3000 photos? A couple hundred bucks for a scanner and whatever you value approximately 67.5 hours of your time.

I don’t like the “There’s just stuff bumping into other stuff, and how is that free?” Argument. I feel like it’s unessisarily reductive.

A stone washing down a river might be guided deterministically by fundimental forces, as are all of the actions of a human brain.

However, the stone was dislodged by erosion. My will was set into motion by abstract human concepts. My memories, biases, emotions, education, habits, etc. these are not fundamental or physical forces. I was free, uninhibited by state or peers, to decide based on these internal factors.

Sure, if you rewinded time and replayed it, I would always make that decision, and so would the stone wash down the river, but the human had a meaningful perception of free will.

I would argue that free will is not a physical concept, but a phycological one. It succeeds in describing the experience of mulling over a decision, and freely acting upon it. It is fair and reasonable to say it, just like in my example it is fair and reasonable for me to say a terrible person is evil.

If you twist the definition of free will contain some mention of subatomic autonomy, then sure, it doesn’t exist, but the concept predates such ideas…

Heck, even the Bible- I’m an atheist- but the point of writing that God gave humans free will was the expression of the human experience. The writers wanted to explain why being a human FELT different from being a stone. They were grappling with the experience of consciousness in a spiritual way. The original text never claims to be the ultimate expression of physics. It’s reductive to dismiss the text as meaningless just because some later “free will” proponents claimed that the brain is quantum or whatever.

Sorry, I agree with you about the nature of the universe. I just think these reductive debates are, in general, unproductive. I believe they misrepresent the subject from both sides.

Hmm. I disagree a bit with this idea, but more on the grounds of semantics. In a deterministic world, you might fret over a decision for weeks, taking influence from several factors. You are free to make any decision, and your will may be driven by rational desires.

In this model, at an atomic level, you have no special, privileged position. A magical being with a perfect physical simulation could perfectly predict your actions in the same way as the movement of a falling stone.

However, unlike a stone, your mind is tuned by all sorts of important human factors. Your memories, habits, biases, education, relationships, and perception. Just because they are the result of the same fundimental physical properties doesn’t mean they are suddenly devoid of meaning or random.

Alternatively, if we imagine a world where the human mind is dependent on non physical, non deterministic factors. Does it actually change our previous hypothetical decision? Probably not. You’d still make a similar decision based on all of those human factors. Perhaps, this hypothetical non deterministic human might occasionally decide to “flip a coin” so to speak, and do something truly random, but to me that feels uninformed and uninteresting to my own experience. Few definitions of free will demand that we be able to make random decisions.

I feel as if the answer to this is, by general consensus, yes. You have free will.

Like, does Evil exist? Scientifically? No, absolutely not, but the word still has meaning. If I say, “that man is evil!” And you look at him and recognize his terribleness, then, sure: he is IS evil.

Just because something isn’t objectively, physically quantifiable, doesn’t mean that it’s not a valid rational construct.

I think the actual argument which has been making the rounds recently, is not, “do humans have free will?” But, Rather is, “are humans accountable for their actions, given that thier will is significantly biased by factors outside of their control / awareness?”

It’s just that doesn’t get people’s attention.

Ps, I believe that fundamentally, all physical interactions are deterministic in practice. Any conscious or rational being is fundamentally set in motion with the arrow of time, and if you could develop a fuzzy quantum state based intelligence, you’d only succeed in creating a person with slightly more random ideas. There would be no meaningful uplift in “free will.” However, I also Believe that this is an absurd deconstruction of heady topics. It’s akin to telling someone that a table doesn’t exist because it’s just a decomposing tree. Free will is a rational idea for human animals, and judged by that standard, fulfills it’s purpose in describing the experience of conscious decision making.

I already have an everything app where I can date, do banking, and even use Twitter. It’s called Firefox.

For these unplanned hours, I look to the majesty and simple wisdom of nature for my answer:

I sleep slovenly, pass gas, and growl half heartily at anyone who disturbs me. Plus, I think if great apes and big cats could read, they’d probably consume at least as much Yuri light novels as myself.

Awesome job! Here is the first image dalle-3 generated of you.

Not overly convincing, but look at those hands!

I’m gonna make a guess you’re in school?

In that context, probably she wanted to get a reaction out of you. It could be that she is a bully, but if she is someone you get along with, or a friend, she may think you’re interesting and want to see your reaction.

It sounds silly, but sometimes people pinch or poke people they like, just you see them react.

She probably wasn’t expecting you to spank her back, but she was the first to spank, so your retaliation was understandable.

If it continues and she keeps spanking you, and you don’t want her too, you should ask her to stop, and if she keeps it up, report her.

I’m not anti ai, I use it generative ai all of the time, and I actually come from a family of professional artists myself ( though I am not ). I agree that its a tool which is useful; however, I disagree that it is not destructive or harmful to artist simply because it is most effective in thier hands.

1. it concentrates the power of creativity into firms which can afford to produce and distribute ai tools. While ai models are getting smaller, there are frequently licensing issues involved (not copywrite, but simply utilizing the tools for profit) in these small models. We have no defined roadmap for the Democratization of these tools, and most signs point towards large compute requirements.

2. it enables artist to effectively steal the intellectual labor of other artist. Just because you create cool art with it doesn’t mean it’s right for you to scrape a book or portfolio to train your ai. This is purely for practical reasons. Artists today work thier ass of to make the very product ai stands to consolidate and distribute for prennies to the dollar.

you fail to recognize that possibility that I support ai but oppose its content being copywritable purely because firms would immediately utilize this to evade licensing work. Why pay top dollar for a career concept artist’s vision when you can pay a starting liberal arts grad pennies to use Adobe suit to generate images trained in said concept artists?

Yes, that liberal arts grad deserves to get paid, but they also deserve any potential whatsoever of career advancement.

Now imagine instead if new laws required that generative ai license thier inputs in order to sell for profit? Sure, small generative ai would still scrape the Internet to produce art, but it would create a whole new avenue for artist to create and license art. Advanced generative ai may need smaller datasets, and small teams of artist may be able to utilize and license boutique models.

I disagree with this reductionist argument. The article essentially states that because ai generation is the “exploration of latent space,” and photography is also fundamentally the “exploration of latent space,” that they are equivalent.

It disregards the intention of copywriting. The point isn’t to protect the sanctity or spiritual core of art. The purpose is to protect the financial viability of art as a career. It is an acknowledgment that capitalism, if unregulated, would destroy art and make it impossible to pursue.

Ai stands to replace artist in a way which digital and photography never really did. Its not a medium, it is inference. As such, if copywrite was ever good to begin with, it should oppose ai until compromises are made.

I think my lead deferred it as a case covered by code inspection. So… probably not! I don’t work at ge anymore 😁

While investigating an uncovered node in some aviation datalink software, I discovered a 15 year old comment from 1993 along the lines of, “this function never runs, I’ll fix it later.” I wish will all my heart I could have heard their voice. Even if just for a moment.

Instinctually, I don’t like this idea. I’m all for eliminating cars and roads, but delivery drivers are already vulnerable and exploited enough. I can’t imagine delivering packages for Amazon in the searing heat here in Florida while every car tried to run you off the road.

Yikes, I wonder if they issued a warning first