It shows a lack of drive access to resources that allow you to do an unpaid internship.

I learned about it because Richard stallman gave a speech at my campus (pre-controversy) and half his speech was the gnu copy pasta unironically. Which I get, if i made core software that most of the world’s server runs on, I wouldn’t shut up about it either.

It keeps you on there site. Same reason Twitter banned links and has grok now, the longer you stay on the site the more likely you are to look at or even click on an ad on that site. If you google something, then quickly scroll past the first couple ad links and click on the first non ad link you are maybe only staying on Google for 1 or 2 seconds. If you get an “ai overview” at the top and start reading through that then you’re maybe spending 10-30 seconds reading through that. That’s another 10 seconds that the ad was displayed that Google can go to there ad customers and say people were looking at it longer.

Another reason more motivated by user experience is also that the AI has a better “understanding” of meaning compared to typical search algorithms. Say you search “Starbucks price at closing” when you meant “Starbucks stock price at time of market closing” an AI would be more able to discern that meaning as opposed to a traditional algorithm which may show you the closing time of the nearest Starbucks, or the price of one of there drinks etc.

That may be true for small or mid size startups that are reliant on VC money, but we’re talking about Google and Microsoft here, they already have there money printers going and don’t need VC money.

They had just as much control with the old search algorithm, though. They could still pick and choose what you see on the search results with their opaque algorithm. The only difference would be that instead of only showing some regime captured media outlet they could generate there own narrative on the fly, but it’s not like there’s a shortage of sycophantic media written by actual people they could pull from.

deleted by creator

Yeah, it’s the top posts that were posted in the last six hours. Unless you have a pretty wide sub list it’s usually better if you do it for everything/all, eg. https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/?dataType=Post&listingType=All&sort=TopSixHour . Otherwise top 12 hour or top day is usually good

deleted by creator

This is lemmy, people hate China, America and commercial social media. Not a big fan of any of those three either so yeah, fuck em. Would be better if we banned all commercial social media but I’m not gonna cry over only some of them getting banned.

Another very surprising outcome of the research is the discovery that these LLMs do not, as is widely assumed, operate by merely predicting the next word. By tracing how Claude generated rhyming couplets, Anthropic found that it chose the rhyming word at the end of verses first, then filled in the rest of the line.

If the llm already knows the full sentence it’s going to output from the first word it “guesses” I wonder if you could short circuit it and say just give the full sentence instead of doing a cycle for each word of the sentence, could maybe cut down on llm energy costs.

I think a lot of services are doing this behind the scenes already. Otherwise chatgpt would be getting basic arithmetic wrong a lot more considering the methods the article has shown it’s using.

it’s between North America and South America

You’re thinking of the Caribbean sea, the gulf of Mexico is bounded by the united states to the north, Florida and Cuba to the east and Mexico to the south and west.

It being called the gulf of Mexico or gulf of America isn’t really going to change anything

It will literally require changing every map and GIS database in the country. Think of all the work NOAA will have to do deal with this BS. Even besides the annoyance and cost of updating all of those it will cause confusion with the rest of the world who will still call it the gulf of Mexico.

What, it’s not e commerce , its massive amounts of data, and a massive amount of content. Most people i know who use tik tok never use the store, they use tik tok because it gives them a seemingly limitless amount of content that interests them. They’re able to do this not because they have some secret sauce but because of the sheer volume of people using and posting to the app. The more people watch the more data they have for there algorithm to identify trends, interest groups, interest groups correlations etc. to allow them to identify and target content to an audience. The more people that post the more you can inundate that audience and keep the infinite scroll going.

If tik tok did get shut down and everyone switched to reels or YouTube they would benefit from the increased scale and it would be pretty much the same app within a couple months.

While I agree with the sentiment, I’d say this qualifies as news. Elons not buying shake shack, he’s buying a social media platform with a very opaque algorithm that has the power to influence a large chunk of the American public. Even if he tanks it, twitter has shown that through network and data ownership combined with sheer inertia many people will remain on an app even after its been revealed to have its thumb on the scale for one side.

170 million people

Where’s that number coming from. Maybe you mean the 165 billion installs , but that’s not active users and double counts people installing on multiple devices. Tik tok has 50 million dau Of those maybe 10% is actually “speaking” and creating content that the other 90% consume so around 5 million people.

And those 5 million people aren’t silenced, they can still go on to one of multiple apps that provide the same service and allows them to get there message out. He’ll they could come on to the fediverse and post blatant ccp propaganda and no one will do anything.

X is years of experience , y is a combined axis, technical knowledge for the green line and salary for the red line

Full protectionism does cause problems with inflation and degrading the competitiveness of firms, but full neoliberal globalism leads to a race to the bottom on wages and working conditions.

The answer is somewhere in the middle, we shouldn’t be putting blanket tariffs on a country or the entire world. But we also shouldn’t turn away from possibly helpful protectionist policies.

Tarriffs can help in new and developing industries to make sure they aren’t strangled in the crib by foreign competition. A large reason for the success of the development of south Korean and Taiwanese economies was due to initial protectionist policies . The tariffs have to be understood to be temporary though but they can help in getting an industry off the ground.

I’d argue electric vehicles are an emerging industry that will be very important if the world shifts to a greener economy. Letting China take over that market and dominate it would be detrimental to the strength of our economy long term.

Bridging solidarity and developing empathy between the laborers of both nations undermines both corrupt empires.

That’d be great but social media has if anything been a hindrance to building solidarity. Culture war bs has always spread faster and divided more than any class consciousness and solidarity has united. Its amplified small fissures in a broad liberal western cultural consensus, so the larger cultural differences between China and the u.s. would only make it worse.

The only way it might build solidarity is through that national adversarial relationship. Just like how on reddit the liberals and socialist mostly team up against the conservatives, but on here there is way more left/liberal infighting. The only thing that unites people is a common enemy, and as long as social media is ruled by capitalism, capitalist will never be that enemy.

One of the main supporters for this was the UAW. Real rich people don’t care about this, if this hadn’t passed they wouldve just sold there shares in American auto companies and invested in Chinese companies, or moved manufacturing to China for higher subsidies, lower labor costs and even bigger profits, or use that as a threat to lower wages here. Under globalism capital is free to move to wherever there is the most profit.

This isn’t a rich vs poor situation, it’s a worker vs consumer situation.

On one hand this will slow the ev transition.

On the other car manufacturing is one of the few industries left in America with some union density and decent wages and having to compete with subsidized Chinese evs that are made with a fraction of the labor costs would destroy that industry.

Globalism hurts workers and helps consumers. One of the triumphs of neoliberalism is to get people to identify as consumers first and workers second.