I just mean that the aphorism about drugs dealers is colorful and amusing. I understand it’s making a real point but it’s also funny.

I havent heard that one. That’s rich.

I’d really like to fix the whole mess. Our economy relies on these folks but they are kept a second class, subject to exploitation and prosecution at any time. All so agricultural and construction labor can be got for less than minimum wage. It’s disgusting and broken. And anytime the racists get riled up, they have a legal basis to browbeat everyone with. It’s ridiculous.

I have to wonder how many would ever use it to file for a tax refund though. Wouldn’t that out them to the government?

Yeah you can’t really talk though.

Only 3? Found the optimist!

I’m pretty sure an AI could throw out a lazy straw man and ad hominem as quickly as you did.

Yes of course edge and corner cases are going to take much longer to train on because they don’t occur as often. But as soon as one self-driving car learns how to handle one of them, they ALL know. Meanwhile humans continue to be born and must be trained up individually and they continue to make stupid mistakes like not using their signal and checking their mirrors.

Humans CAN handle cases that AI doesn’t know how to, yet, but humans often fail in inclement weather, around construction, etc etc.

Yep we are on the same page. At our best, we can reach higher than regurgitating patterns. I’m talking about things like the scientific method and everything we’ve learned by it. But still, that’s a 5% minority, at best, of what’s going on between human ears.

It doesn’t take the entirety of the internet just for an LLM to respond in English. It could do so with far less. But it also has the entirety of the internet which arguably makes it superior to a human in breadth of information.

My thing is that I don’t think most humans are much more than this. We too regurgitate what we have absorbed in the past. Our brains are not hard logic engines but “best guess” boxes and they base those guesses on past experience and probability of success. We make choices before we are aware of them and then apply rationalizations after the fact to back them up - is that true “reasoning?”

It’s similar to the debate about self driving cars. Are they perfectly safe? No, but have you seen human drivers???

Just as a point of perspective, I’m 51 and my wife is 46. We are entirely independent and on great terms with all our parents. I still don’t relish the idea of staying overnight at her parents house with them.

Pretty condescending though and makes a lot of age based assumptions.

Yeah, considering what garbage tends to top the trending charts at YT, I think a blank page is better than if they just show the most popular videos of the day.

It’s interesting - the psychology of that. Recently I was answering someone who asked why the US doesn’t have more of a working class movement, and a big part of my answer was that no one in the US thinks of themselves as part of the working class. Even if they are unarguably at the base of the economy, their plan is to get out of the working class, not make it better. Similarly, I can see Americans having a problem accepting themselves as a permanent minority. In other parts of the world this is just a fact of life. Christians in Syria know they will never be a majority. When rebels ousted Assad, one of the first things they said was that they will treat minorities well. Those minorities know who they are. Similarly, Kurds are 15% of Iraq and that is just a fact based on hundreds of years of ethnic history in the region. But in the US, everyone is on their way to something better (at least so we think). Parts of Europe had very formal class systems for long periods of history so there are people who just think of themselves as working class and they stand for workers’ rights. Not so in the US. No one here is working class or a monitory. We’re too full of all the rhetoric about being created equal.

I’m just hearing it for the first time in this thread but my first impression isn’t great. Do you really want a label that brands you as a “minority?” That doesn’t seem like a great first step toward equality.

You could begin with “summary:”

Your comment reads more like a rebuttal than a summary. If you intend to summarize the article for lazy lemmings, that’s cool, but present it as such.

The article already says everything you said. It’s not a “solution” to anything. It’s a small step to show that this is even possible. Perhaps it will help some people whose condition makes them extraordinarily sensitive.

I swear people will find a way to shit on virtually anything and turn absolutely everything into class war.

It’s the same phenomenon as “LGBTQI+”

It was literally LGB at one point. I understand the concept of inclusion but I think pursuing it by appending and appending and appending is a lousy way to go. I believe the “Q” was finally added in part because it was hoped to be some kind of catch-all, but that didn’t work.