Interesting News, Articles & Stuff

florduh

Well-Known Member
You know who was the most important person on the project? It wasn't me even though I was the lead developer and project manager. The most important person was the statistician who interpreted and tweaked the weights.

Yeah, that's the thing. Garbage-in-garbage-out still seems to apply even if we're talking about AI. Sometimes I think truly general AI, where you could just type an English prompt like "Hey Siri, forecast sales opportunities based on the last 5 years of sales data" is decades away. At the same time I see shit like this and it freaks me out:


Nothing in this video is pre-written. It's two AI's conversing on the fly. I like how the "male" AI immediately starts trying to bang the "female" AI. And this is GPT-3. GPT-4 is just around the corner.




If you invested $1,000 when Matt Damon debuted his Super Bowl "Fortune favors the Brave" ad, you'd now have about $300.

Matt Damon Money GIF by South Park
 

His_Highness

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
Yeah, that's the thing. Garbage-in-garbage-out still seems to apply even if we're talking about AI. Sometimes I think truly general AI, where you could just type an English prompt like "Hey Siri, forecast sales opportunities based on the last 5 years of sales data" is decades away. At the same time I see shit like this and it freaks me out:


Nothing in this video is pre-written. It's two AI's conversing on the fly. I like how the "male" AI immediately starts trying to bang the "female" AI. And this is GPT-3. GPT-4 is just around the corner.
Programs can only do 3 things - Sequence (Execute a series of statements in sequential order), Selection (Decide whether something is true or false and execute code based on that decision), and Iteration (Loop or do something over and over). A human uses these three simple techniques to make a computer do something simple or incredibly complex. No matter how "intelligent" something a computer does.....it all comes down to these simple techniques, applied by humans, tested by humans and this is what worries me....

Back in the 60's there was a missing period or hyphen in a program in conjunction with an equipment issue that caused the loss of a satellite not to mention the money associated. The coding was done by humans, the test cases were developed by humans, the test execution was done by humans and the satellite was run by humans. All points of failure because ... Humans.

If you had a data point that might contain a value of only "1" or "2" and you want a program to react differently based on the value.... its easy to see we would need two test cases. One to test "1" and do something and another to test "2" and do something. Now lets add an additional data point that could also contain a "1"or "2" .... now we need four test cases and all we had were two data points and two values. Can you imagine how many data points and values a self-driving car has?!
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
Can you imagine how many data points and values a self-driving car has?!

Apparently one too many for Tesla...


Tesla brags that their "autopilot" never causes an accident. But that's because if the system senses an imminent crash, the autopilot shuts down. They say it's to allow the human driver to take over and correct course. Except it only allows the driver a few seconds (at best) to take back control and avoid the accident. It's a bonus for Tesla that this also allows them to claim their autopilot is safe.

I've been wondering what the difference is between what Elizabeth Holmes did with blood testing and what Elon Musk is doing with self driving cars. Both lied to investors and customers about how far along those respective technologies are. Musk was out there years ago saying they're close to a full autopilot that can drive itself without human input. Not even close.
 

His_Highness

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
I've been wondering what the difference is between what Elizabeth Holmes did with blood testing and what Elon Musk is doing with self driving cars. Both lied to investors and customers about how far along those respective technologies are. Musk was out there years ago saying they're close to a full autopilot that can drive itself without human input. Not even close.
The difference between Holmes, Musk and the lying......IMO

Being charismatic, having a large hyped up following but more important....keep telling the same lies, add new more entertaining lies and just don't stop lying..... seems to work.

Depends on the audience though.....try the above as a kid with normal, well meaning parents who aren't afraid to discipline their kids and you would see a different outcome.
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
Being charismatic, having a large hyped up following but more important....keep telling the same lies, add new more entertaining lies and just don't stop lying..... seems to work.

Adding new more bombastic lies seems to be what separates them. The Holmes show on Hulu was really good. She was seen as sort of charismatic in the same way Musk is. I think they were cut from the same cloth. He's just been able to keep the money faucet on longer.



SpaceX is probably the only Musk venture I have any respect for. And even then he's still up to his old tricks.

FUCPD8zWYAAZT0g


He now says he'll put a million people on Mars within 25 years. Hopefully he's as wrong about that as he's been about Tesla autopilot and putting the first Man on Mars by this year. Because all those people are gonna fucking die up there.

I have a friend who says she wants to go. I told her to do a winter in Antarctica first and see how you like it. It's warmer. There's still air. Your DNA won't be constantly nuked by cosmic radiation. Your muscles won't waste away due to suboptimal gravity.

Honestly, I don't get what the Mars obsession is about. The Moon is just as much of an unlivable shithole. But at least there you're only 4 days away from Earth if something goes wrong. Not 4 months. Better views too.
 

ClusFcuk

Member
All these "charismatics" are convinced only they can save America, or whatever

Musk believes that mankind is doomed on earth and wants to "colonize" the universe with with humans,
he thinks it's the only way humans will survive. It's bad enough we've ruined every place on earth we "colonized" he wants to continue with the entire universe.

There's a reason the more intelligent being only "observe" us, they want nothing to do with us!
 

MilesHigh

Black Taoist
The stupidest part about this idea is that even if we had a Mars colony, if civilization on earth collapsed any time within the next few centuries, everyone on Mars will die too.


If we manage to colonize another planet, we wont make it a century before we have to coin a new term for world war. Someone will feeel someone else has too much of something and we will be figbting our own colony.
 

ClusFcuk

Member

NASA is assembling a team to figure out what UFOs are​

The US space agency is not claiming that extraterrestrial life exists, they note. Their stated mission is instead to protect national security; make sure that UFOs don't endanger aircraft; and otherwise serve practical needs. Over a period of nine months, experts in aeronautics, data analytics and a range of relevant scientific disciplines will analyze information about UAPs from a comprehensive spectrum of sources.


If they're intelligent enough to get here I think they can manage to avoid causing any deaths to humans
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
If we manage to colonize another planet, we wont make it a century before we have to coin a new term for world war. Someone will feeel someone else has too much of something and we will be figbting our own colony.

You're probably right. That's how most sci-fi turns up. But at the same time, I can't imagine there are any resources on Mars that would be worth the cost of bringing them back to Earth. Everybody's still using the same 100 year old Nazi chemical rocket technology. We need a major leap in propulsion tech before this sort of stuff becomes financially attractive.


So I guess the question is, how many of the victims were shot by the cops? Because now I'm pretty convinced it's more than 0. Though I can think of a way they can prove me wrong.
 

MilesHigh

Black Taoist
You're probably right. That's how most sci-fi turns up. But at the same time, I can't imagine there are any resources on Mars that would be worth the cost of bringing them back to Earth. Everybody's still using the same 100 year old Nazi chemical rocket technology. We need a major leap in propulsion tech before this sort of stuff becomes financially attractive.


So I guess the question is, how many of the victims were shot by the cops? Because now I'm pretty convinced it's more than 0. Though I can think of a way they can prove me wrong.


Holy horseshit. They won't release the footage because it will enable future criminals to study it and find weaknesses? That would have required there to be good police work and a functional set of tactics in place. At this point they dont even bother with believable statements.
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
Holy horseshit. They won't release the footage because it will enable future criminals to study it and find weaknesses? That would have required there to be good police work and a functional set of tactics in place. At this point they dont even bother with believable statements.

Yeah, no kidding. They've already demonstrated to future mass shooters that cops are pussies who won't act in time to stop them. They've changed their story so many times and have been caught in so many lies that they've got to be hiding something horrible.

The refusal to release the bodycam footage looks horrible. So whatever's on the video must be worse for them.
 

MilesHigh

Black Taoist
Yeah, no kidding. They've already demonstrated to future mass shooters that cops are pussies who won't act in time to stop them. They've changed their story so many times and have been caught in so many lies that they've got to be hiding something horrible.

The refusal to release the bodycam footage looks horrible. So whatever's on the video must be worse for them.

I dont see how anything on the footage could be worse tban what we already know. Police set up a perimeter and protected the shooter from being stopped until he had completed his task. They enabled him to increase his body count, regardless of the spin they try to apply thier actions contributed to the number of dead children. Whether it was thier finger on the trigger, or tbe absence of thier finger on the trigger, the things they did, and the things tbey failed to do, raised the death toll.
 

JaaCeeDee

Member
I'm more interested in the "audio"

I'd like to hear the conversations the cops were having with each other about not going in right away,

I'd like to think at least some of the officers wanted to storm the place, but who knows,

Eventually everything will be released, along with a minute by minute video about how it played out
 

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
The footage probably shows that they were fighting about how to proceed and that nobody was in authority so they were all afraid to act due to liability concerns. While children died inside the room. It's obviously going to be a bad look, but those vids need to go public.
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
due to liability concerns.

I'm not a lawyer, so I could be wrong. But my understanding is it's almost impossible to hold cops liable for anything.

It also seems like they're usually more than willing to release bodycam footage when they murder someone or engage in police brutality. Almost like it's a little warning to everyone. "Look what we can get away with without consequence". Another reason I believe the Uvalde footage has got to be bad.

I wonder if they'll be able to keep all of those 911 calls from those babies crying out for help from being released. Has anyone been fired or resigned in shame over this? I haven't heard anything.
 

MilesHigh

Black Taoist
The footage probably shows that they were fighting about how to proceed and that nobody was in authority so they were all afraid to act due to liability concerns. While children died inside the room. It's obviously going to be a bad look, but those vids need to go public.

Audio is all we need, no one needs to see kids being killed to know tbe police actions added to the death toll. The audio would show they failed to follow procedures due to fear of being shot or screwing up and shooting kids. Plain and simple it will prove tbey are undertrained, over armed and nothing but bullies with badges. They were afraid of 1 untrained 18 year old punk, so afraid they failed to commit and stop him from killing children . The entire episode exposes the reality they arent about to go door to door and confiscate guns from gang members or combat vets, its all bullshit and fairy dust for the masses. They had far more police on location than they will at every home they try to breach, they also had the floorplans and the opportunity to have already run drills and prepared for dynamic entry on tbat very building. It exposes the lie they can go door to door on buildings/homes when they wont have that type of numerical advantage, floorplans (or the guarantee of untrained shooters waiting on the otherside of tbe door) . The emperor has no clothes, and niether does his pretorian guard.
 
Last edited:

JaaCeeDee

Member
I'm not a lawyer, so I could be wrong. But my understanding is it's almost impossible to hold cops liable for anything.

It also seems like they're usually more than willing to release bodycam footage when they murder someone or engage in police brutality. Almost like it's a little warning to everyone. "Look what we can get away with without consequence". Another reason I believe the Uvalde footage has got to be bad.

I wonder if they'll be able to keep all of those 911 calls from those babies crying out for help from being released. Has anyone been fired or resigned in shame over this? I haven't heard anything.

I believe SCOTUS has already determined that police officers are under no "duty" to put their "lives in danger"
they might "choose to do so" for a fellow officer, but when the shooting starts we, and our children, are on our own

 

MilesHigh

Black Taoist
I believe SCOTUS has already determined that police officers are under no "duty" to put their "lives in danger"
they might "choose to do so" for a fellow officer, but when the shooting starts we, and our children, are on our own


Exactly. So, who you gonna call when violence pays a visit to you? Clearly your safety and the safety of your loved ones is a personal problem. We waste a ton of money on a broken and misused tool. The entire system is broken and based on the lie they are there to protect and serve.
 
Last edited:

JaaCeeDee

Member

“Prove to the World You’ve Lost Your Son”

How a Tulsa grandmother became a vicious Sandy Hook conspiracy theorist—in her own words.

Today, one-fifth of Americans believe all major mass shootings are staged, according to Joe Uscinski an associate professor of political science at the University of Miami who studies political conspiracy theories. These false theories will no doubt torment the families of the victims in Texas, just as they did in Sandy Hook. How could anyone, a parent no less, not only believe these delusions but make it a point to confront the families with them? Pozner wanted to know. This is the story of one of those people.


There are many people who should be "forced" to see the photos & videos!
 
Last edited:

Planck

believes in Dog
I believe SCOTUS has already determined that police officers are under no "duty" to put their "lives in danger"
There, SCOTUS reminded us the only time police have liability to citizens for failing to provide police protection is:

  1. “Imminent Danger,”
  2. After police accept a duty to do something,
  3. When police deny you police protection based upon your race or some related civil rights violation.
Not specifically directed to you @JaaCeeDee but the quote is from the link you posted.

1) Is an active shooter in a school not “Imminent Danger”?
2) Many police have "Protect and Serve"on patrol vehicles, I've never seen one that indicates who to p&s.

The thin blue line.
 

MilesHigh

Black Taoist
There, SCOTUS reminded us the only time police have liability to citizens for failing to provide police protection is:

  1. “Imminent Danger,”
  2. After police accept a duty to do something,
  3. When police deny you police protection based upon your race or some related civil rights violation.
Not specifically directed to you @JaaCeeDee but the quote is from the link you posted.

1) Is an active shooter in a school not “Imminent Danger”?
2) Many police have "Protect and Serve"on patrol vehicles, I've never seen one that indicates who to p&s.

The thin blue line.

Just to be clear, I was formerly one of tbe most highly sought after speakers and trainers for IALEFI. I was asked to lead two of tbe world conferences before quitting due to misuse and abuse of the teaching materials I provided. I taught negotiation, neutralization and use of force to multiple government agiencies, Port Authorities and several SEAL teams over 2 decades. I quit in disgust after hearing horror stories of how the materials I provided were misused and in some cases used to justify acting like pussies.

I said tben and I believe it now that the zero tolerance BS in schools raised a generation of kids who never got in a fight, never got punched in the nose and thus never learned to deal with stress and fear. Now tbey graduate from tbe academy without any experience with stress and fear and thier first reaction is to fear bite (shoot first to be safe). Toxic masculinity as they like to call it has been replaced with scared pussies relying on fear and intimidation instead of confidence and skill. Its only going to get worse as intelligent people will shun the organizations and uniform.


 
Last edited:

JaaCeeDee

Member
I noticed a deterioration in the intelligence of officers while I worked as a personal trainer in the Miami area between 1980-2000. I spent a good deal of my time racing from one client to the next, usually to be forced to wait because they were "stuck in traffic."
I also spent a lot of time on the side of the road having interesting conversations with officers who pulled me over, lots of fun!
I don't want to think about what those guys are like today.
 
Top Bottom