• 0 Posts
  • 8 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: October 21st, 2023
  • sorter_plainview@lemmy.todaytoComic Strips@lemmy.world•There is another.
    6·
    13 hours ago

    The sudden rapid re-release of all that sequestered carbon is as natural as the process that formed it 378M years ago.

    Let me highlight. You are telling industrial revolution, and the emmision of green house gases is as natural as, some other process happened in the nature? And humans continued doing it even after knowing the consequences of it, even when there were much better alternatives abundantly available?

    I’m struggling to see the “natural” part of it.

  • sorter_plainview@lemmy.todaytoNews@lemmy.world•Kids groups say they didn’t know OpenAI was behind their child safety coalition
    3·
    16 days ago

    I’m extremely conflicted about this.

    On one hand I believe, ads industry is behind the age verification laws, and governments and law enforcement agencies are taking this as an opportunity to increase surveillance on citizen.

    On the other hand, there are genuine risk in not regulating tech products used by kids. Especially AI chats. But I’m not convinced age verification is the solution.

    When the IT proliferated in 90s and 2000s, tech companies played the standard game of arguing that the laws present at that time were inadequate for regulating them, and this resulated in the surveillance nightmare we are currently in. The former Commissioner of Federal Trade Commission of USA, Lina Khan, in an interview with Jon Stewart, pointed this out, and drew parallels on how AI comapnies are using the same playbook now.

    This is a classic trick played by capitalism, where they push for “unregulated” free market. This usually results in severe harm on kids and marginalized groups in the society, because oppressor get more power and accountability is non existent. But at the same time, every attempt to bring in regulations usually results in increased surveillance by data brokers and governments, which helps these groups to either make money or get into power.

    All these power hungry maniacs, and money making machines, don’t care about a common person. People are commodities for them. A resource to make money or get into power. Unless things start to have a people first approach, ironically which is what democracy claims to do, this is going to be bad for a common person like you and me. We suffer, they gain. We get oppressed, and they get more power to oppress.

  • sorter_plainview@lemmy.todaytoProgramming@programming.dev•“Good Taste” Is Just Experience
    7·
    21 days ago

    The tooling around AI should be to improve the quality of the programmer. Not to write the code for the programmer.

    For example if you ask an agent how to scale things well, and best practices in architecture, it will have a lot of resources on it. But that does not mean the code it will produce when you ask it to write a programme will consider and include the best practices it gave you in a separate question. That is the ‘intelligence’ part that LLMs cannot have. If you ask a it to do a certain way it will create it. Context tries to address this by prompting the user to give more, but that is not persistent.

    This is exactly why senior devs finding LLMs works for them, because they know ‘how’ to do it, and they explicitly state it. But at the same time junior devs feel they think the code written by LLM is the ‘best’ way so solve a problem and superior in quality, even if it is not, because they don’t know any better.

    Tooling should be able to help the developers improve their knowledge and skill on ‘how’ to do it. Instead it always focus on writing the code. I want to add that I’m not talking about algorithms. But every aspect of coding, in which the programmer needs to know ‘how’ to do it.