FaceDeer

It’s important to say the “20” prefix so that viewers will know that we’re set in “the future.”

I don’t know how you’re measuring efficiency, but a heat pump with greater than 100% efficiency lets you build a perpetual motion machine. That’s not possible.

There are some cities that do things a third way; they have a centralized facility that burns the gas (or other fuels) to generate electricity, and then also pipe the heat out to the city in the form of heated water or steam running through insulated underground pipes. Buildings tap into those pipes and run it through radiators. That has the potential to be even more efficient because you’re using what would otherwise be “waste” heat, but it depends on a relatively compact city to avoid losing too much heat while sending it through the pipes. I understand this is not uncommon in Eastern European and Russian cities. I’m not familiar with the details, though, so if you want to know more about this I’d recommend Googling around a bit.

Oh, probably because it’s cheaper and more efficient.

If you wanted to use the gas in a gas power plant to produce electricity to run an electric heater, there’s a bunch of steps where energy gets lost. The turbine and generator isn’t 100% efficient and the transformers and transmission wires lose energy along the way to your house. Whereas burning something directly for heat is nearly 100% efficient, the only waste is whatever heat gets carried away by the exhaust. Which isn’t much with a modern high-efficiency furnace. I’ve got one of those and every once in a while I knock icicles off of the exhaust vent outside when I pass it. They use countercurrent exchange to keep all the heat inside the house.

Yet, exceedingly rare to see fires from this

You just answered your own question. The techniques for running gas lines into houses and hooking them up to furnaces are very refined at this point, it can be done safely.

Ah, good, that makes this less of a dilemma then.

On the one hand not fond of the CCP, and this is a step toward making Taiwan more “safely” invadeable.

On the other hand not fond of the United States throwing its weight around like it’s in charge of the world and not fond of monopolies in general.

So hard to settle on a reaction for this.

They’re doing what the “contract” always allowed.

It is interesting, IMO, that with AI we see the opposite of the usual trend; the fancy new disruptive technology seems to be liked more by the older crowd, and less by the younger ones.

Right, you take the article at face value. So exactly as I originally said:

you sure are relying on just believing whatever you read without any checking whatsoever.

For every news article you read?

That’s the point here. AI can allow for tedious tasks to be automated. I could have a button in my browser that, when clicked, tells the AI to follow up on those sources to confirm that they say what the article says they say. It can highlight the ones that don’t. It can add notes mentioning if those sources happen to be inherently questionable - environmental projections from a fossil fuel think tank, for example. It can highlight claims that don’t have a source, and can do a web search to try to find them.

These are all things I can do myself by hand, sure. I do that sometimes when an article seems particularly important or questionable. It takes a lot of time and effort, though. I would much rather have an AI do the grunt work of going through all that and highlighting problem areas for me to potentially check up on myself. Even if it makes mistakes sometimes that’s still going to give me a far more thoroughly checked and vetted view of the news than the existing process.

Did you look at the link I gave you about how this sort of automated fact-checking has worked out on Wikipedia? Or was it too much hassle to follow the link manually, read through it, and verify whether it actually supported or detracted from my argument?

Okay, we’ve established how you don’t do it. So how do you go about the process of fact checking every news article you read?

30 % increase in preformance? or “we WOn’T nEEd progRAmMers iN 3 yEars”?

You think people aren’t going to want to use AI unless it does literally everything for them? That’s exactly the “if something’s not perfect then it must be awful” mindset I was criticizing in the comment you’re responding to.

I don’t see a link to that research, but that means 38% don’t believe AI is significantly overhyped.

If my job depends on saying you are correct… Mr. FaceDeer you are always correct, the most correct ever.

You are now arguing that the source that you yourself brought into this discussion is no good.

This is ridiculous.

Okay, so how do you go about the process of fact checking every news article you read?

Source for what?

And you sure are relying on just believing whatever you read without any checking whatsoever.

Here’s an example of how AI fact checking can find errors in even extremely well-curated data sources.

I just responded to a similar question by [email protected] above, listing a bunch of things I do with AI that having a framework embedded right into Firefox would make a lot more convenient, hopefully it provides some answers for this as well.

Earlier on, Mozilla released a plugin called Orbit that summarized Youtube videos with a single click. Then they shut it down. I’d love to see that back. I’ve found some similar plugins since then but none as elegant and integrated as Orbit was. “Chat with this page” features in general are nice when I come across a big paper or news story where I only want a specific bit of information out of it.

I use the “translate this” function quite frequently, and I’d like to see that using local models instead of relying on Google Translate. I avoid Chrome because I don’t want everything to be Google dominated.

I suspect AI is still too heavyweight for this application yet, but as the advertising wars continue and advertising starts getting slipped directly into the content of pages I bet an AI-enabled adblocker would be nice.

A fact-checker AI that goes through the content of a page and adds footnotes and references would be great. I try to fact-check news stories but it’s a lot of manual drudgery so I’m sure I miss a lot.

Sure, much of this could be done with plugins. Orbit was one originally. But if everybody’s having to create the AI framework for plugins from the ground up that’s going to result in a ton of inconsistency, extra resources wasted, and potential insecurities. I’d like Firefox to provide some kind of unified interface to plugins to let them call AIs as part of whatever they’re doing so that I can pick which models I’d like them to use. I run Ollama on my computer, it provides AI inference to anything that wants to use it locally through a unified API. Something like that built into Firefox would be awesome.

And there’ll likely be plenty of other new things I haven’t thought of to try out. AI is a very active field, there are new models with new capabilities coming out all the time.

Am engineer. I use AI features in browsers, and know several others who also do. I’m looking forward to trying additional features Mozilla’s going to be bringing in the future.

Basing your view of what everyone does on what everyone you know does is a perfect way to amplify the effects of a social bubble.

What does the cybertruck have to do with any of this? This is nonsensical.