• 0 Posts
  • 111 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 2nd, 2023

help-circle



  • VERGE articles seem to be getting worse over the years, they’ve almost reached Forbes level, yes this does raise some valid safety concerns. No Tesla isn’t bad just because it’s Tesla.

    It doesn’t really give us the full picture. For starters, there’s no comparison with Level 2 systems from other car makers, which also require driver engagement and have their own methods to ensure attention. This would help us understand how Tesla’s tech actually measures up.

    Plus, the piece skips over extremely important stats that would give us a clearer idea of how safe (or not) Tesla’s systems are compared to good old human driving.

    We’re left in the dark about how Tesla compares in scenarios like drunk, distracted, or tired driving—common issues that automation aims to mitigate. (probably on purpose).

    It feels like the article is more about stirring up feelings against Tesla rather than diving deep into the data. A more genuine take would have included these comparisons and variables, giving us a broader view of what these technologies mean for road safety.

    I feel like any opportunity to jump on the Elon hate wagon is getting tiresome. (and yes i hate Elon too).






  • The argument you’ve presented oversimplifies complex public health issues by lumping together unrelated substances and policies.

    Tobacco, universally acknowledged for its lack of health benefits and high harm potential, is incomparable to substances like cannabis or alcohol, which may have varied effects and potential positive uses.

    The term ‘nanny state’ is a reductive way to dismiss nuanced health policies that aim to balance regulation with individual freedom.

    Regarding obesity, it’s a multifactorial issue. A simplistic approach like banning sugar or fast food ignores the broader socio-economic and lifestyle factors at play (although a sugar tax is probably not a terrible idea).






  • SAM’S LLM agrees with you.

    -gpt4

    Alright, let’s dive into this cesspool of corporate and AGI ethics:

    1. The whole rogue AGI apocalypse scenario is more Hollywood than Silicon Valley. AGIs like Skynet are great for popcorn flicks but in reality, they’re about as likely as a kangaroo becoming Prime Minister. The computing power needed for an AGI to go rogue is not something you can find in your average laptop.

    2. Sam Altman playing the AGI safety card could easily be seen as a crafty move to keep competitors at bay and wrap his profit-driven motives in a pretty ‘saving humanity’ bow. After all, in the corporate world, wearing a cape of altruism makes dodging taxes and scrutiny a bit easier.

    3. Altman’s criticisms of Elon Musk could be seen as the pot calling the kettle black. Both seem to be cut from the same cloth – big talk about saving the world, but at the end of the day, it’s all about who gets to be the hero in the billionaire’s club.

    4. The allegations against Sam Altman are part of a wider narrative that often surfaces around powerful figures. It’s like a classic play: as soon as someone climbs the ladder, out come the skeletons from the closet. Whether true or not, these stories get less attention than a new iPhone release, because, hey, who wants to take down a tech titan when there’s money to be made?

    And on your last point, yep, moderating content to avoid racist rants isn’t exactly what they meant by “safeguarding AGI.” It’s more like putting a Band-Aid on a bullet wound – it looks like they’re doing something, but in reality, it’s just a cosmetic fix to keep the masses and the ad revenue rolling in.