I think I’m referring to something much more difficult. In most of the places I’ve worked, if your boss says that the plan is… actually they won’t call it a plan they’ll call it a strategic direction… that we will all flap our arms and fly to the moon and mine the green cheese that is there, it’s not ok, even as a moon expert, to reply that the moon isn’t made of green cheese. That would hurt your boss’s feelings. They won’t say “It hurts my feelings when you expose my ignorance”, they’ll just say you have a poor attitude, or that you don’t know how to communicate.

There are unwritten rules about how people need to restrict knowledge to themselves and those they trust in order to gain power. To these people, loyalty is more important than the truth, so in order to demonstrate that I am trustworthy, I have to at least appear to accept the green cheese strategic direction, even if I manage it by gradually using different words until the actual work that needs to be done is included in the strategic plan. To a neurotypical person this is just basic office politics and they just nod and say yes to their boss and work it out from there, but to us it hurts not to be able to speak the truth and discuss ideas openly.

There are certainly photoshop jobs of this image, but as far as I can tell, the black and white version with the sign saying ‘pon farr night fridays’ is the original. I’d like to know where the photo came from though.

…quotation marks… That’s enshittification at work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification A backwards step from… Alta Vista in 1996!!! https://jkorpela.fi/altavista/

Damn. Just when I’d learned to pronounce Eyjafjallajökull.

Stopped going when they made shit coffee.

“has a model of how words relate to each other, but does not have a model of the objects to which the words refer.

It engages in predictive logic, but cannot perform syllogistic logic - reasoning to a logical conclusion from a set of propositions that are assumed to be true”

Is this true of all current LLMs?

Thank you for replying. This is the level of info I used to love on Reddit and now love on Lemmy.

Thanks for your reply, I appreciate the correction and the info.

Interesting article.

“Instead of passing a law preventing civilians from carrying weapons of war, they enacted a rule prohibiting spectators from carrying small signs into meetings.”

“Americans, whether they own a gun or don’t, want guns kept out of the hands of dangerous and unstable people. Americans, whether they vote for Republicans or Democrats, don’t want children to be blasted into bits at their school desks. As we have lately learned here in Tennessee, that’s a lot of common ground.”

The thing that strikes me about LLMs is that they have been created to chat. To converse. They’re partly influenced by Turing tests where the objective is to convince someone you’re human by keeping up a conversation. They weren’t designed to create meaningful content or factual content.

People still seem to want to use chat GPT to create something, and fix the accuracy as a second step. I say go back to the drawing board and create a tool that analyses statements and tries to create information based on trusted linked open data sources.

Discuss :)

Ah, the positive characteristics of people who are early adopters of new technology, and capable of navigating their way onto a system where signing up wasn’t trivial. Seems to be highly correlated with language skills like spelling, grammar and vocabulary. I recognise my privilege.

The customer is not always right. Sometimes the customer is a douchebag.

Ah, the corporate enshittification of search.

Oh, this EPA?

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/482352-trump-budget-slashes-funding-for-epa-environmental-programs/

Top marks to this family!

Umm… correlation vs causation?? Anyone??

Angry upvote you brilliant bastard!