|
In a new paper published in the journal Ethics and Information Technology, a trio of philosophy researchers from the University of Glasgow in Scotland argue that referring to chatbot's propensity to make crap up shouldn't be referred to as "hallucinations," because it's actually something much less flattering. The technical (but accurate) term
Sorry to your little sister
|
|
|
|
|
In Trump circles, it's known as "alternative facts".
|
|
|
|
|
Let's face it, calling any LLM program artificial "intelligence" is itself bovine excrement.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs. - Thomas Sowell
A day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)
|
|
|
|
|
Love it! 
Now where's the browser extension to automatically replace all references to "AI" or "LLM" with "bullsh!t machine"?
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
When you consider the training source (public internet), of course LLMs spit out crap.
|
|
|
|
|
DenseAV, developed at MIT, learns to parse and understand the meaning of language just by watching videos of people talking, with potential applications in multimedia search, language learning, and robotics. Meow meow meow, meow
At least from the videos I watch.
"I am Big Billy, the biggest wet willy. I'm going to go clearly. Mhmmm"
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: Meow meow meow, meow
Has someone been watching the "meow mix" advert[^] on repeat?
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
 Guilty
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Businesses have become more cautious about investing in artificial intelligence tools due to concerns about cost, data security, and safety, according to a study conducted by Lucidworks, a provider of e-commerce search and customer service applications. Magic AI isn't magic?
|
|
|
|
|
This is entirely out of character for them. I thought they always dive in head first, spend a pile of money, and then worry about potential fall out (cost, security, etc.) later. Microsoft's antics with the "Recall" debacle is an example of this.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
You can't have pain without AI.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft has announced that the DirectAccess remote access solution is now deprecated and will be removed in a future release of Windows, recommending companies migrate to the 'Always On VPN' for enhanced security and continued support. They almost had me panicking there when I heard ___Access was going away
As I recall, it frequently timed out trying to reconnect to the network if you didn't keep it active all the time
|
|
|
|
|
Company cites safety, speed, approachability, and built-in C and C++ interoperability as Swift’s compelling advantages. So get busy rewriting, C++ folks
|
|
|
|
|
Swift tries too hard to be different from C/C++ to stand out. For example, ++ and -- operators do not exist in Swift through += and -= exists.
Its for-loop are different and inflexible. This is a C for loop to increment from 0 to 10
for(int i=0; i<=10; ++i)
{
printf("%d", i);
}
This is Swift version of the same thing. It has limitations that it cannot increment more than one in a single step or decrement.
for number in 0...10
{
print(number)
}
This is a C for loop to increment from 0 to 9
for(int i=0; i<10; ++i)
{
printf("%d", i);
}
This is Swift version of the same thing.
for number in 0..<10
{
print(number)
}
This is the C for-loop that increment from 0 to 256 in steps of 16
for(int i=0; i<=256; i+=16)
{
printf("%d", i);
}
This is Swift version
for number in stride(from: 0, through: 256, by:16)
{
print(number)
}
This is C for-loop of decrementing by steps of 16.
for(int i=256; i>=0; i-=16)
{
printf("%d", i);
}
This is Swift version of decrementing by steps of 16.
for number in stride(from: 256, to: 0, by: -16)
{
print(number)
}
C for-loop syntax more or less stay the same while Swift's change depending whether you want to increment more than one or decrement.
C version of do-while
do
{
...
}
while (i<10);
Swift version of do-while
repeat
{
...
}
while (i<10);
These are some examples. The try-catch exception is also very different.
I tried to port my Windows DirectX application to Apple Metal but I gave up because the Swift's syntax is too different. I do not mean they should be the same. At least, the basic syntax should stay the same instead to be different in order to differentiate Swift from other C-compatible languages. So that I only struggle on the DirectX/Metal differences rather than the language's unimportant differences.
modified 12hrs ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, no.
C++ isn't going anywhere. Not in my lifetime. Not in yours. If I had kids, not in theirs.
The fact that languages like Rust and Swift are touted by their authors as C++ successors just reinforces the idea that C++ is the language to "beat". (Such as that means anything in this context)
C++ is flexible, powerful, and entrenched. The fact that it has been around for decades means sheer inertia will keep it moving for many more.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
In this blog post, we will highlight some of the most notable improvements that you can experience in version 17.10, such as faster Windows Forms designer loading, faster Razor colorization, quicker solution loading, and reduced DLL overhead. Not just bigger, but faster too (in places)
|
|
|
|
|
It now crashes much faster
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
The shortest horror story: On Error Resume Next
|
|
|
|
|
A research team from MIT announced a new programming language. Finch, its creators say, is “a simple bytecode interpreted, purely object-oriented, prototype-based, dynamically-typed programming language.” For those about to chirp, we salute you
|
|
|
|
|
Great, another bird-brained language.
I’ve given up trying to be calm. However, I am open to feeling slightly less agitated.
I’m begging you for the benefit of everyone, don’t be STUPID.
|
|
|
|
|
The US is still regulating some enriched uranium based on an analysis from the 1950s. And hopefully not *be* one
|
|
|
|
|
Really, really old sci-fi book "When Worlds Collide" I believe had atomic rockets in it. Yep I found them
When Worlds Collide - Wikipedia[^]
and
After Worlds Collide - Wikipedia[^]
Now try to find them in a library.
I’ve given up trying to be calm. However, I am open to feeling slightly less agitated.
I’m begging you for the benefit of everyone, don’t be STUPID.
|
|
|
|
|
I would have expected those to be on Project Gutenberg, but no luck (nor at my library, double drat)
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Found them here
When Worlds Collide book by Philip Wylie[^]
I’ve given up trying to be calm. However, I am open to feeling slightly less agitated.
I’m begging you for the benefit of everyone, don’t be STUPID.
|
|
|
|
|
They are available as Kindle books.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Regarding the usability of not highly enriched uranium, there is a paywalled article in the current edition of Science:
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ado8693[^]
It tells us that uranium enriched to more than 10% U-235 can be used to build a bomb, but you may need a ton of it.
On the other hand, when such 10-20% enriched uranium is used - and thus produced - for commercial purposes, the currently clear line of distinction of "weapon uranium" and "civil uranium" gets blurred, and non-proliferation checks fail.
Oh sanctissimi Wilhelmus, Theodorus, et Fredericus!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
