mountainriver

joined 2 years ago
[–] mountainriver@awful.systems 6 points 1 day ago (5 children)

UK Asks People to Delete Emails In Order to Save Water During Drought

The part of data centers using to much water is apparently old emails.

What I'm on about? I think the english term is "damning with faint praise". If this is the best that can be done, which I am arguing, there isn't much use to it.

The latest one is an outlier, in that it doesn't have a voice over, so it isn't a radio play. Most of the other ones I have seen has a voice track that tells the story. They are also more dreamlike which matches the prediction of what kind of story can be told from one of the comment threads here (from one of the pivot videos about VEO).

The latest one (and the only one to gone viral) is actually interesting in that he is trying to tell a visual story, but with the medium he has chosen he can't have a novel character as protagonist really, or dialogue, which is why it is limited to a very simple story.

I'm interested in why it is so limited, because I think that tells a lot of the limitations of the technology as such.

[–] mountainriver@awful.systems 16 points 2 days ago

The most well documented genocide while it is happening. First livestreamed genocide. If you can't see this genocide happening, then you could never see a genocide until afterwards.

Of course they can't figure out what is going on, using their own eyes is not in the interest of the oligarchs they serve.

[–] mountainriver@awful.systems 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Joining the war on teen pregnancies on the side of teen pregnancies to bring back the ideal past of - check notes - the 1990ies in the US.

(At least a cursory look points toward teen pregnancies in the US peeking some time in the 1990ies.)

[–] mountainriver@awful.systems 6 points 6 days ago

Most medical careers work well internationally, in principle. Something to keep in mind is that language proficiency may be a stated or unstated prerequisite for employment, in particular if you have contact with patients. If you work with the machines (lab technician, etc) the language may be of less importance. Or at least, so I have heard. Relevance depends on your country of choice and your pre-existing language skills, of course.

To bad attempt number one didn't work well. Better luck with attempt number two.

[–] mountainriver@awful.systems 5 points 6 days ago

general-purpose simulators which simulate conversations that agents, oracles, genies, or tools might have

Good formulation, but in the spirit of the article I would say "might have had". Being per definition trained on existing material they can produce likely imitations of conversations that already exists. One would suppose the value of a conversation between oracles and geniuses would be to produce something new, on effect text that is more than the statistically likely output.

Good article, thanks for linking it.

[–] mountainriver@awful.systems 12 points 1 week ago

Historians like to use "state capacity" as a term for what a state is capable of doing. The government leader might want to build a great bridge, and might order it done, but depending on which state in which era it might not be a thing that is possible to execute.

I didn't think we would see a powerful state like the US so willfully destroy its state capacity (except for violence), but here we are and “everybody who knows how to access the money got fired”

[–] mountainriver@awful.systems 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I hadn't read HPRick and Morty, so thanks for that!

Lots of gems about wizard fascism. I liked this part:

"It means, oh golly oh gee, that uh, one day science will discover space travel and cryogenics and then we'll all be, uh, immortal space gods with our own private stars, Professor!"

Harry hated how inarticulate he sometimes sounded outside of his own internal monologues, which were much more elaborate. One of these days he would have to sit down and write down his internal monologues in a coherent sequence.

[–] mountainriver@awful.systems 12 points 1 week ago

For those that (like me) is out of the loop and don't get it, Wikipedia comes to the rescue:

In one of the advertisements that was particularly controversial, Sweeney says that "genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality, and even eye color. My jeans [or genes] are blue". Another voice then declares "Sydney Sweeney has great jeans".

[–] mountainriver@awful.systems 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

FWIW, I think he's wrong in the causation here. During the heyday of the British Empire history was one of the high status subjects to study, and they wrote it in very plain language. Physics on the other hand was seen as mostly pointless philosophy, and in the early 19th century astronomy was a field so low in status that it was dominated by women.

I would say the causation is money giving the field status, and lack of money hollowing out status. Low status makes the untrained think they can do it as well as the trained. You had to study history and master it's language to make a career as a colonial administrator, therefore the field was high status. As soon as money starts really flowing into physics, the status goes up, even surpassing chemistry which had been the highest status (and thus also manliest) science.

If one wants to look at the decline of status of academia, I recommend as a starting point Galbraith's The Affluent Society, that goes a fair bit into the post war status of academia versus business men.

I think the humanities were merely the weak point in lowering the status of academia in favour of the business men.

[–] mountainriver@awful.systems 7 points 2 weeks ago

One of the products was removal of unwanted hair. You radiated and the hair just fell off! How practical!

To be fair to the radium people, I don't think the correlation between radiation and cancer was established until the aftermath of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Still one could see hair falling of as a warning sign of sorts.

 

Capgemini has polled executives, customer service workers and consumers (but mostly executives) and found out that customer service sucks, and working in customer service sucks even more. Customers apparently want prompt solutions to problems. Customer service personnel feels that they are put in a position to upsell customers. For some reason this makes both sides unhappy.

Solution? Chatbots!

There is some nice rhetorical footwork going on in the report, so it was presumably written by a human. By conflating chatbots and live chat (you know, with someone actually alive) and never once asking whether the chatbots can actually solve the problems with customer service, they come to the conclusion that chatbots must be the answer. After all, lots of the surveyed executives think they will be the answer. And when have executives ever been wrong?

 

This isn't a sneer, more of a meta take. Written because I sit in a waiting room and is a bit bored, so I'm writing from memory, no exact quotes will be had.

A recent thread mentioning "No Logo" in combination with a comment in one of the mega-threads that pleaded for us to be more positive about AI got me thinking. I think that in our late stage capitalism it's the consumer's duty to be relentlessly negative, until proven otherwise.

"No Logo" contained a history of capitalism and how we got from a goods based industrial capitalism to a brand based one. I would argue that "No Logo" was written in the end of a longer period that contained both of these, the period of profit driven capital allocation. Profit, as everyone remembers from basic marxism, is the surplus value the capitalist acquire through paying less for labour and resources then the goods (or services, but Marx focused on goods) are sold for. Profits build capital, allowing the capitalist to accrue more and more capital and power.

Even in Marx times, it was not only profits that built capital, but new capital could be had from banks, jump-starting the business in exchange for future profits. Thus capital was still allocated in the 1990s when "No Logo" was written, even if the profits had shifted from the good to the brand. In this model, one could argue about ethical consumption, but that is no longer the world we live in, so I am just gonna leave it there.

In the 1990s there was also a tech bubble were capital allocation was following a different logic. The bubble logic is that capital formation is founded on hype, were capital is allocated to increase hype in hopes of selling to a bigger fool before it all collapses. The bigger the bubble grows, the more institutions are dragged in (by the greed and FOMO of their managers), like banks and pension funds. The bigger the bubble, the more it distorts the surrounding businesses and legislation. Notice how now that the crypto bubble has burst, the obvious crimes of the perpetrators can be prosecuted.

In short, the bigger the bubble, the bigger the damage.

If in a profit driven capital allocation, the consumer can deny corporations profit, in the hype driven capital allocation, the consumer can deny corporations hype. To point and laugh is damage minimisation.

view more: next ›