A friend of mine is albino and turned down a job offer in South Africa around that time. The thought of even being on the same continent with that going on made him profoundly uncomfortable.

To sell the narrative of cutting waste. The fact that people will be hurt by this doesn’t factor into their consideration in the slightest and they need to stay on message.

On top of that they say that these sorts of behaviors only arise when the models are “stressed”, and the article also mentions “threats” like being unplugged. What kind of response do they actually expect from a fill-in-the-conversation machine when the prompt it’s been asked to continue from is a threat?

Goldstein suggested more radical approaches, including using the courts to hold AI companies accountable through lawsuits when their systems cause harm.

The suggestion that this is a “radical approach” might actually be the most insane part of what is already a fairly insane article.

This is really what blows my mind the most. With all this talk about how much power LLMs and diffusion models use companies are still constantly cramming it into places where it’s just running all the time passively doing things no one asked for.

Overall power use by these things would probably be cut down by an order of magnitude by just limiting it to directed, intentional use only.

It’s a basic AC rectifier, the resistor represents an arbitrary DC load. You use similar circuits all the time, though generally with additional failsafes and some mechanism of smoothing out the rectified current.

“Conduit” is the word for those tubes for wires. Probably a shared etymology with “conductor” though.

Having the pipes in the mortar/bricks sounds like a maintenance nightmare.

What blows me away is how much of it is so obviously AI but people seem to just not notice. You do see it called out from time to time, especially on Lemmy, but in the wider Internet it’s much more common to see people just engaging with it.

Ah, if you need to build a .NET project that makes sense

Nuget is a the .NET package manager. Like npm or pip, but for .NET projects.

If you needed it for a published application that strikes me as fairly strange.

…no? Why would it be?

Let’s table that discussion.

I’m okay with a DM ruling that it’s possible to cast it in such a way that someone is taken off guard, sure. Maybe a performance or deception vs hostile creature(s) insight rather than the typical stealth vs perception when determining surprise from sneaking, which is not RAW, but I think sounds reasonable. I’d definitely not consider it to be an automatic aspect of the spell at any table I ran.

And you absolutely could not avoid a fight and just walk away from the situation with plausible deniability because you “only insulted them”.

This is probably a diffusion model. LLMs don’t create images.

While desalination does need a lot of energy it’s dealing with the waste brine that’s the bigger problem when actually planning one. You can’t just dump it back into the ocean without killing a huge swathe of marine life.

skibidi [adj.]

- nonsense (derogatory)

That’s my pick.

Ignoring the actual rules and mechanics is basically step one in almost every “isn’t this goofy” D&D anecdote.

Not only is it not “decent damage” (even the buff it got in 5.5 just brings it from “the worst” to “poor”), it’s also not a subtle thing you can just drop on someone unsuspectingly.

Spellcasting for an attack is an obvious aggressive action, which means an initiative roll comes first to see if you even manage to get it off before they clock you. It’s also not like everyone around just shrugs and lets you go about your business because all you did was hurl an insult. You attacked someone with an offensive spell, the response is exactly the same as if you threw a firebolt at them

The flavor of insulting someone to death is fun, I’ll grant that, but there’s nothing special about Vicious Mockery mechanically that makes it immune to initiative order or people noticing what you’re doing.

You never get to court, that’s the point the previous comment is making.

As an individual trying to stand up to them you’re somewhere between being either completely ineffectual or making the situation worse. Having the law on your side doesn’t matter because it’s impossible for you to summon the enforcement of it fast enough to help you, assuming they even would.

A local community response that will mobilize and appear in your neighborhood in seconds is basically the only way to respond quickly with enough force for them to care about.

I’m not sure why you’re taking a oppositional tone. To be clear I’m complaining, not trying to justify it.

Literally no one I work with likes Teams but we keep using it because that’s just what we do. Other options basically don’t exist simply by virtue of being either not Microsoft or not overwhelmingly the market leader.