You want to see a picture of me when I was younger?

Thought “libs” was an American specific term. My apologies.

I guess you’re part of the American right? You see… the right in the US has been fed a steady stream of Russian propaganda through their talking heads for a while now. So the right has become indistinguishable from Russian bots. Sorry for the confusion!

That is a great idea. I’m in.

I’m in the US, and I can assure you the amount of effort that would go into breaking that system would be 1000+ fold.

Here’s the thing… your computer/phone, just to run programs, is sitting on somewhere around 40-50 million lines of code in the operating system. It’s got another 20-30 million for all the supporting user space libraries. People want to vote from any device, and operating systems have become walled gardens. Now we need to interact with browsers. That’s another 30 million lines. You know how many bugs I need to find to compromise a system? 1. It’s not necessarily a skill issue. It’s an attack surface issue.

And this is assuming the bug was an accident. There are much more insidious vulnerabilities out there (see the recent exploit found in xz). Along that same vein, there could be exploit generators in the compilers (that’s 15 million lines) that build all these systems.

We won’t have online voting until we fundamentally change how we compute. I don’t see that happening any time in the near future. None of these corporations are going to be breaking down their walls anytime soon.

I’m not sure what metric you’re using to determine this. The bottom line is, if you’re trying to get the CPU to really fly, using memory efficiently is just as important (if not more) than the actual instructions you send to it. The reason for this is the high latency required to go out to external memory. This is performance 101.

While you’re not wrong, I don’t ever recall people en masse believing a game AI was truly intelligent. Everyone was always aware of the truth. There just isn’t a great name for the computer players. I think it’s an important distinction here because people do believe ChatGPT is intelligent.

That would be nice in the future. Unfortunately, the modern Web is not even in the ballpark of being secure enough for something like that (and it’s trending worse, not better).

Just wanted to point out that the number 1 performance blocker in the CPU is memory. In the general case, if you’re wasting memory, you’re wasting CPU. These two things really cannot be talked about in isolation.

Guy from '95: “I bet it’s lightning fast though…”

No dude. It peaks pretty soon. In my time, Microsoft is touting a chat program that starts in under 10 seconds. And they’re genuinely proud of it.

All aboard the hype train! We need to stop using the term “AI” for advanced auto complete. There is not even a shred of intelligence in this. I know many of the people here already know this, but how do we get this message to journalists?! The amount of hype being repeated by respectable journalists is sickening.

…taking out people before they move in.

Then, they look confused when I tell them I don’t want the thing connected to the Internet.

I say insurance fraud. They were never leaving the lot.

Software guy here. I’d like a paper ballot. If it’s possible, it wouldn’t be done correctly anyway.

100% this. The base algorithms used in LLMs have been around for at least 15 years. What we have now is only slightly different than it was then. The latest advancement was training a model on stupid amounts of scraped data off the Internet. And it took all that data to make something that gave you half decent results. There isn’t much juice left to squeeze here, but so many people are assuming exponential growth and “just wait until the AI trains other AI.”

It’s really like 10% new tech and 90% hype/marketing. The worst is that it’s got so many people fooled you hear many of these dumb takes from respectable journalists interviewing “tech” journalists. It’s just perpetuating the hype. Now your boss/manager is buying in =]

Damn he did all that work to help you… I have a friend just like you. They send me videos of these clowns on YouTube that tie the most random events together to come to the most insane conclusions. Like trivial to disprove stuff. And they turn their channels into little echo chambers by pruning everything out of the comments that isn’t “Thanks for speaking the truth!”

Whoever your YouTuber is, they are lying to you.

Lol, Russia found out

Just because the YouTuber that told you this isn’t Russian, doesn’t mean it’s not Russian propaganda.

It reminded me of this quote from Max Planck (emphasis mine):

As I began my university studies I asked my venerable teacher Philipp von Jolly for advice regarding the conditions and prospects of my chosen field of study. He described physics to me as a highly developed, nearly fully matured science, that through the crowning achievement of the discovery of the principle of conservation of energy it will arguably soon take its final stable form. It may yet keep going in one corner or another, scrutinizing or putting in order a jot here and a tittle there, but the system as a whole is secured, and theoretical physics is noticeably approaching its completion to the same degree as geometry did centuries ago. That was the view fifty years ago of a respected physicist at the time.

Basically, there isn’t much left to be discovered in physics, so don’t bother. (Good thing he didn’t follow that advice.) Then, Einstein comes along and is like… you know Newton’s “laws” of motion? I broke 'em. He also broke the aforementioned “law” of conservation of energy.

So, while we actually do understand the physics of the Big Bang until about the first few milliseconds (not much left to be discovered), we don’t know what we don’t know.