[–] 2 points 8 hours ago

I try to always keep good bags like that. The number of times it's paid off is in the hundreds/thousands. Every time I move especially. All those items that have pieces that need to be kept up with suddenly are super easy to deal with if you have random baggies.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 10 hours ago

    It's astounding how they have literally zero desire to inspire and all desire to depress. It must just be something every normal person's brain is incapable of understanding. Because there is actually zero chance that an ML is not the smartest and most moral person in world history.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 0 points 13 hours ago

    Seems like it would've been easy to train the model to never repeat back something like that. "I can't help with that" would've been appropriate and not caused their business the damage this will. If they're too stupid to set that up and ensure it works consistently, why would anyone not assume the product will be full of even more issues than you'd already expect if you know anything about LLMs?

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

    Even when I try to use my phone, I often have issues with the website I'm ordering from. Try on my laptop and it usually works fine. The truth I think is that developers build on desktops/laptops, so they test more there. It's easier for them. This makes it more likely for bugs to crop up anywhere that gets less testing. I myself have not always tested all of the "safe" changes I've made (on every browser/platform).

    And yes, as a generation who grew up with the extremely user friendly form factor that allows tiled windows, easy tab switching, and shortcut keys... Giving all that up to not have to get up off the couch seems silly most of the time.

  • source
  • [–] 46 points 16 hours ago

    I actually point and laugh at every one I see. Driving one of those tells me you're an idiotic Nazi with horrible taste. Some of the paint jobs I've seen on them have been especially hilarious.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 17 hours ago

    The problem with this attitude is that it presupposes that scientific discovery is linear, predictable, and evaluable without context or scientific knowledge, from an armchair.

    For all we know, a study like this could accidentally reveal something about gut health in cats, which later is confirmed to be true about humans, which later is combined with other knowledge to treat bowel cancer.

    When you devalue "dumb" science because you judge it at face value, you devalue all science. Republicans are very fond of doing this also and it's helped create more scientific ignorance in the public and it has made less funds available for science.

    There's nothing more worthy of having money spent on it than science. You're obviously not a scientist, and even if you were, you cannot predict the future or know what you don't know. Scientific knowledge is like a giant puzzle and we don't know what all the pieces are ahead of time or how they fit together.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    Lol that's horrible. The author of this article says that dogs are prolific farters but I've had two dogs and neither farted super often. Definitely not denying it's happened but it's not something I've noticed that much and especially not to the degree you just described!

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›