MacNCheezus

MacNCheezus , 2 hours ago

I think that's just regular Copilot (without the plus). This is a newer version, at least that's what this quote from the article leads me to believe:

I got ahold [sic] of the Copilot+ software and got it working on a system without an NPU about a week ago

The regular Copilot (without the plus) that sits in the taskbar was rolled out in an update about a month or two ago.

Also, this part of the article gives a method to check if it's running:

Q. How do you obtain the database files?

A. They’re just files in AppData, in the new CoreAIPlatform folder.

Unfortunately there are at least two AppData folders (three to be exact, but one of them is rarely used), and it doesn't specify whether it's %APPDATA% or %LOCALAPPDATA%, but I just checked on my Windows machine (Win11 with all updates installed, including Copilot), and I can find no such folder in either of these paths.

MacNCheezus , 2 hours ago

Always has been.

MacNCheezus , 4 days ago

The problem is if you earn that money doing something you hate, you'll very often find that no amount of money is enough to compensate for your loss of happiness. The trick is finding a way to earn enough money not to have to worry while doing something you enjoy (or at least can tolerate) doing.

MacNCheezus , 4 days ago

I'm glad to hear that and I wish you all the best. The world can certainly use more happy and fulfilled people right now.

MacNCheezus , 4 days ago

Like if you steal out of necessity, and get caught once, you then just starve?

I mean... you could try getting on food stamps or whatever sort of government assistance is available in your country for this purpose?

In pretty much all civilized western countries, you don't HAVE to resort to becoming a criminal simply to get enough food to survive. It's really more of a sign of antisocial behavior, i.e. a complete rejection of the system combined with a desire to actively cause harm to it.

Or it could be a pride issue, i.e. people not wanting to admit to themselves that they are incapable of taking care of themselves on their own and having to go to a government office in order to "beg" for help (or panhandle outside the supermarket instead).

MacNCheezus , 6 days ago

Sure, the AI is never going to understand what it's doing or why, but training it on better datasets certain WILL improve the results.

Garbage in, garbage out.

MacNCheezus , 6 days ago

Well yes, I've seen those examples of ChatGPT citing scientific research papers that turned out to be completely made up, but at least it seems to be a step up from straight up shitposting, which is what you get when you train it on a dataset full of shitposts.

MacNCheezus , 6 days ago

Yes, I understand that. But I'm fairly certain the quality of the data will still have a massive influence over how much and how egregiously that happens.

Basically, what I'm saying is, training your AI on a corpus on shitposts instead of factual information seems like a good way to increase the frequency and magnitude of such hallucinations.

MacNCheezus , 6 days ago

Yeah, I mean that’s basically what GPT4Chan did, which someone else already mentioned ITT.

Basically, this guy took a dataset of several gigabytes worth of archived posts from /pol/ and trained a model on that, then hooked it up to a chatbot and let it loose on the board. You can see the results in this video.

MacNCheezus , 5 days ago

New SkyNet origin story just dropped

MacNCheezus , 6 days ago

Could it be that economics is more of a social science than a physical one, and therefore its "laws" cannot be expected to have the same level of stringency and consistency as the laws of physics?

No, it's economics that's wrong.

MacNCheezus , 6 days ago

cough quantum physics cough

MacNCheezus , 6 days ago

I studied econ as a minor and I don't recall any of my professors ever making the pretense that it was some sort of ultimate or incontrovertible truth. In fact, I'm fairly certain that's where I learned the expression "all models are wrong, but some are useful".

MacNCheezus , 5 days ago

That’s a good point, and kinda reminds me of the Efficient Market Paradox, which basically says an efficient market is impossible since there would be no profit to be made, and hence, no point in participating. But if people drop out because of that, inefficiencies will invariably pop again, thus presenting an opportunity for those seeking to profit, which of course only ends up restoring the efficiency.

So in essence, the market is always just teetering on the edge of efficiency, never fully getting there yet never straying too far either. Perhaps there’s a corollary here (or a similar paradox) that explains why the assumption of rationality, as ridiculous as it seems at face value, is in fact also valid and reasonable.

MacNCheezus , 7 days ago

You can always write in your own candidate. Not that it's likely to sway the vote in any significant way, but at least it might help you feel better about your choice.

MacNCheezus , 9 days ago

This should give hope to all of those people who have been worrying about AI taking their jobs away.

It doesn't matter how good technology gets, it will always be merely a tool. Humans will still be necessary in the future.

MacNCheezus , 9 days ago

It will certainly change the way we work, yes, but that's always been the case with any disruptive technology in the past.

20-30 years ago, people were already worried that computers would replace people, because they could automate away menial office jobs like invoicing and book keeping. Yet those jobs still exist, because computers can't be trusted to work completely autonomically. Meanwhile, a whole lot of new jobs were created in the IT sector as result of those computers needing to be programmed, updated, and maintained.

When cars came around and started replacing horse buggies, people were also worried because it would make horse breeders, stables, blacksmiths, etc. obsolete, but of course it just ended up created a new industry consisting of gas stations, car dealerships, and garages instead.

So yes, some people might lose their jobs because what they're doing now will become obsolete, but there will almost certainly be new ones created instead. As long as you're willing to adapt and change with the times, you're never going to end up with nothing to do.

MacNCheezus , 8 days ago

It is. Unfortunately it does tend to use up a lot of RAM and requires either a fairly fast CPU or better yet, a decent graphics card. This means it's at least somewhat problematic for use on lower spec or ultraportable laptops, especially while on battery power.

MacNCheezus , 10 days ago

Crime might be down, but homelessness is way up, or it at least feels that way. They're everywhere these days, even in my sleepy suburb, loitering in parks and sleeping in public greenways, destroying the vegetation and often leaving piles of trash behind.

No, I'm not arguing they deserve to go to jail for that, but you have to agree that it's difficult having empathy for people who keep turning every inch of public property into an eyesore. But I don't think the problem will ever be solved by fingerpointing, because that's just passing the blame around, which ultimately helps no one.

I think there needs to be a bigger discussion about what can be done to help these people regain a sense of purpose in life. It seems to me that most of them are simply severely disillusioned or even repulsed by how our current society works – go to work, pay your bills, rinse and repeat until you reach retirement age. They got tired of the rat race and the constant pressure to perform and are simply choosing to live a primitivist lifestyle instead, but without having any higher goals or ideals to strive for, it's inevitable that they're going to sink back into the mud.

Human beings need to have a sense of purpose, they need to feel useful and appreciated in some way in order to keep making an effort day after day. It's not enough to house them and feed them because without purpose, most of them will still end up turning to alcohol and drugs simply in an effort to pass the time.

MacNCheezus , 9 days ago

Giving them public lands unfortunately doesn't solve anything. They did try that my city, and the result was that this land has basically turned into a huge garbage dump.

MacNCheezus , 9 days ago

I think you missed the part of my comment where I said people need to feel useful. Giving them money for doing nothing will never achieve that. While it might help ease the burden of having to work an unfulfilling job just in order to stay alive to continue working, at best that'll buy them some temporary breathing room. But without a sense of purpose, most people will still end up turning to drugs or alcohol simply to pass the time. It's just far easier to distract yourself than it is to face the vast emptiness of living a meaningless existence.

MacNCheezus , 9 days ago

Not sure, but I'm guessing likely not. There were a lot more encampments around here last year, but many of them were in places that were either unsafe (such as freeway greenbelts) or privately owned (but accessible to the public). Apparently they did tolerate this one camp, however, because it didn't have any of those issues, but it's still turning into a festering sore at this point.

I honestly don't know what would help here, but all the solutions that I see being discussed on Lemmy always just seem to revolve around giving people free stuff, and I don't think that'll solve anything in the long term. Unless you show people a path to becoming self-sufficient, all you'll ever accomplish is feeding or housing them for a day. While I realize that depending on how deep in the hole someone is, it might take a long time before they feel safe enough again to take risks, but ultimately, unlimited amounts of free stuff will only create dependency.

MacNCheezus , 9 days ago

Yes, I understand that, and I'm not trying to argue it would be better to try nothing at all. What I'm saying is that merely having a roof over your head and food on the table does not automatically translate into a willingness to give back to society by finding ways to contribute in some sort of meaningful way – it merely removes some obstacles and lowers the barrier to entry, but unless people are willing to make an effort to work on overcoming the challenges that still remain after that, they are still not going to ever get better.

Basically, I think it's a mistake to assume that if you give someone free food and housing, they'll just start going out there and look for a job. Some people might, perhaps even most, especially if they don't have to worry about losing their benefits once they do, but some will still prefer to waste their time with drugs and alcohol, and that will foul things up for the rest, because it's difficult to motivate yourself to make a consistent effort when you see others getting the same benefits as you do without doing anything to earn them.

No problem has ever been solved by throwing more money at it. While it certainly may help, it will never be a guaranteed solution.

MacNCheezus , 9 days ago

I mean, if you find yourself in that kind of a situation, your purpose could be trying to find a way to sustain yourself without too much unnecessary suffering, no?

And I certainly agree that it doesn't HAVE to come in the form of a job, because not everyone is cut out of that. Some people are made to be artists, for instance, and simply cannot stand being tied down to something like that. And yes, giving them some breathing room in the form of basic sustenance can certainly help by allowing them to use more of their time to practice their craft, but they still have to WANT to do that, and not everyone does. And the ones who don't tend to try and find ways to sabotage those who do.

All I'm saying is, without a plan for dealing with that problem, no amount of money will ever do the trick.

MacNCheezus , 9 days ago

I agree, and I didn't intend for this to be an argument to do nothing. But I do think it's necessary to have a plan for this situation because few things are worse than setting out with the best intentions and being met with misfortune and failure anyways, since it can take a long time to pick yourself up again after that.

Basically what I'm saying is, if you go out into the forest, it's a good idea to be prepared for running into a wild animal. Best case scenario, it will never happen, but if you keep going again and again, chances are that one day it will. And if you don't have a plan for what to do in that situation, you might end up as their dinner.

MacNCheezus , 9 days ago

Right, that discussion certainly needs to happen, because you simply cannot hope to ever solve a problem without knowing what's causing it, no matter how much resources you throw at it. And perhaps that needs to be a public discussion, because I do think a lot of people out there are willing to help at least in principle, but are often unsure how to go about it. That definitely used to be the case for me because no one ever wanted to talk about it, but after a few very negative experiences where my help wasn't appreciated or even made things worse, I gave up on it for a long time and focused on myself instead, and I have a feeling that this is in fact rather common.

Of course, that did not make the problem go away. In fact, it seems to be getting worse, and clearly we cannot expect any help from the boomers, so it appears to be left to the younger generations to find more effective ways of dealing with it. Sadly, it often seems to devolve into political trench warfare, with people constantly arguing about their preferred strong-arm solutions rather than attempting to find middle ground.

Ultimately, I think it will require much more than political solutions, because those are always temporary and suboptimal. Lasting results will likely require a complete change in culture – meaning a society built on values that people are actually willing to sacrifice for, and that can only happen at the grassroots level.

MacNCheezus , 8 days ago

That sounds like a distinction without a difference, unless you are saying that in addition to land, they should also provide infrastructure for them on top.

Also did you city try collecting their waste?

I don’t think so, at least the last time I passed by there it was still all there. But just so we’re clear what you’re asking, picture about an acre of medium density forest land with a good 100 or so people living in makeshift tents or huts. And there’s trash literally everywhere — some of it piled up in heaps, some strewn about in the bushes, and it smells like a landfill on a hot summer day.

You would probably need a hazmat team to get rid of all that because there might be used needles, rotten food, or who knows what else in there, and more likely than not, someone would end up making a scene because some of their belongings ended up in the trash because they looked virtually indistinguishable from refuse.

It simply isn’t reasonable to demand or expect that others should take the time out of their day and clean up your mess when they’re already doing you a favor by tolerating you being there in the first place. These are grown people, not infants. If there isn’t at least an indication of goodwill and demonstrated intent to collaborate (such as them perhaps getting together and organizing their own cleanup effort, for which the city could provide trash bags and a truck to pick them up), there’s no amount of free stuff you can give them that’ll ever make them self-sufficient.

MacNCheezus , 7 days ago

Thanks for providing an instructive example of the type of destructive mindset that keeps people stuck in homelessness and poverty. Username checks out I guess.

You see, if you blame and attack anyone who even considers offering help, all you’ll do is make sure no one will ever want to do that. It’s literally a sucker’s game — feign helplessness, wait for someone kindhearted enough to offer help, and then take them for everything they’re worth by guilt tripping them to hell for not doing enough. You might as well stalk someone in a dark alley and put a gut to their head, functionally it's no different, just more obvious.

No, the people living in those camps are no more independent than anyone else, because they're not self-sufficient either, are they? If they were, they'd be growing their own food instead of having to rely on donations to feed themselves. So all your criticism is just the pot calling the kettle black. In fact, if you think about it long enough, no human on earth is ever completely independent, because they didn't give birth to themselves, they cannot reproduce without someone of the opposite gender, and even if they live completely off-grid somewhere and grow all their own food, they're still dependent on the weather, or might require a doctor if they fall ill. No true Scotsman and all that.

Instead of complaining that others aren't doing enough, consider why they would WANT to do anything at all. What's the point of sharing food with people who are just going to be ungrateful? Why be kind to someone who won't even consider returning the favor? That's like pouring water into a bottomless bucket.

MacNCheezus , 11 days ago

Indeed, while this idea should work in principle, I've found it mostly useless in practice.

I don't know if all large apartment complexes are notoriously bad, but a few years ago, you'd mainly find horrifically negative reviews on those sites (likely because only people who have had issues with them actually bothered to write a review in order to get their petty revenge on them).

Nowadays, all the management companies are aware of these sites, and they likely either pay Yelp to "manage" their reviews for them and/or incentivize their tenants to leave positive reviews (even though that's technically against the rules). Meanwhile, small buildings generally aren't even listed on these sites or don't have nearly enough reviews to get an objective picture.

MacNCheezus , 11 days ago

Yup, I'm pretty sure I've also seen some leasing offices offer gift cards or one time rent reduction in exchange for a positive review. Like I said, I'm pretty sure that's against the sites' rules but not technically illegal. I suppose you could file a complaint but good look having them take your side over that of a paying customer's.

MacNCheezus , 10 days ago

I find it hilarious that Linux users STILL continue to hate on Windows Update when memes like this exist.

In my experience, Linux wants to update itself far more frequently than Windows (which is really generally no more than once a month these days), and it DOESN'T EVEN OFFER THE OPTION of automatically postponing it to a more convenient time. Yes, you can always say "not now", but then it'll just keep bugging you again until you say yes.

Ironically, at this point, updates on Linux are basically everything that Windows used to get made fun of in the past (for good reason!), but while the situation has actually improved on Windows, on Linux it's only become worse as distributions grow and updates become even more frequent.

MacNCheezus , 10 days ago

That's certainly true, and there may even be advantages to this because security issues might get fixed more quickly, but it doesn't change the fact that the annoyance factor is at least as high as that of Windows used to be, and there is no convenient option to have it taken care of automatically, say, at shutdown.

Instead of making fun of Windows, it would serve Linux far better to actually address this issue, even if that means copying what Microsoft did here.

MacNCheezus , 9 days ago

I mean, popups are by definition intrusive, no?

Windows 11 just shows a little icon in the notification tray and won't really bother you otherwise until you click on it. I think by default it will try to install the pending updates on shutdown, but when you click on the icon you can choose to either postpone it or do it immediately.

Meanwhile, Ubuntu always interrupts you with a popup which yes, you can click "Not now" on if you want to deal with it later, but then it'll just pop up again some other time. And the only other option is to just let it do its thing (but at least it can run unobtrusively in the background and only requires a restart if there's a kernel update).

MacNCheezus OP , 14 days ago

My bad, wrong sub. Will delete, sorry.

MacNCheezus OP , 15 days ago

Haha

MacNCheezus OP , 15 days ago

Well, I just did. Here's the response:

I'm sorry if it feels like I'm questioning your humanity! I'm just programmed to ensure a safe and productive interaction. Sometimes I ask for confirmation to ensure I'm talking to a human and not a machine or a bot. But I'm here to chat and assist you with whatever you need!

Not sure what I was expecting except the usual machine mind evasiveness.

MacNCheezus OP , 15 days ago

I mean, it probably wants to make sure you're using the API for programmatic access so they can charge you for it instead of having you abuse the free tier.

Not sure if they're still around, but in the early days, before the API was released, there were some libraries that simply accessed the browser interface to let you programmatically create chat completions. I believe the first ChatGPT Twitter bot was implemented like that.

This post isn't so much about whether it's necessary from a technical standpoint (it likely is), it's just an observation on the sheer irony and annoyance of it being that way, that's all.

MacNCheezus OP , 14 days ago

At the current state of AI proliferation, you can literally enter you prompt into the product assistant chatbox on Amazon and get the same result you'd get from their web app.

I even remember a post a few months ago where someone did this to the chatbot on a car dealership's website. Apparently, they currently don't have any input filters (which would likely require yet another layer of AI to avoid making it overly restrictive), they just hook those things up straight to the main pipe and off you go.

MacNCheezus OP , 14 days ago

Technically a good point, but we’re talking natural language here, and the goal would be to restrict the discussion to only a particular domain, not predict whether an outcome can be achieved or not.

MacNCheezus OP , 14 days ago

You mean captchas? Sure, that's an old hat, they've been doing that for a decade now.

This is one of those newer systems though that doesn't rely on a captcha, it's just a checkbox you have to click that says "I'm human" next to it, and it does some JavaScript magic or whatever to figure out if it's true. Not really sure how it works TBH.

MacNCheezus OP , 15 days ago

https://i.imgflip.com/3rq7ws.png

MacNCheezus , 15 days ago

Here's the deal: as long as you're not being an asshole about doing any of these things, I'll probably overlook it.

Start acting a fool however, and I'll have the cops come collect you.

MacNCheezus , 17 days ago

TIL that this track featured David Bowie on it.

MacNCheezus , 17 days ago

He also didn't FORCE anyone to give to the poor, he only recommended it.

MacNCheezus , 17 days ago

And that's relevant how? Am I Ananias in your imagination and you're God who's putting me to death for omitting the pickle? Or could it be that I am the poor because I carelessly forgot to mention it and you're witholding grace and mercy from me in the course of your attempts at corrective measures for the sake of Old Testamentarian fire and brimstone punishment?

Come on man, I know it's difficult for you Germans but at least TRY to smile for once in your life. Just imagine the pickles were always there to begin with, and it's at least a half decent joke. But whether or you like it or not, it does remain a fact that Germans call a concoction that MAINLY consists of sausage, pickles and mayo a "salad", and I think that's kinda funny (at least it is to Americans).

And just to be clear, I'm by no means knocking the dish itself, I myself was a huge enjoyer of it during the time I lived in Germany. I honestly admire the kinda of audacity it takes to make a mixture that largely consists of slices of meat and barely any veggies and have everyone agree to call it a salad. Even in a country as obsessed with meat as America is this is simply totally unheard of.

So please accept my apology if I ruffled your feathers, but you were giving such a great example of German pettiness that I couldn't resist to roast you for it. And perhaps that's also an Americanism I picked up during my time here, but that's what people do with their friends, they pull them through to cocoa as you would call it.

MacNCheezus , 17 days ago

Yes, you are right of course. Although tuna and crab aren't technically meat, and those salads exist in Germany as well. At least tuna salad definitely does, except it's generally made with vinaigrette instead of mayo and might have things like bell peppers, tomatoes, or (gasp) actual lettuce in it.

But yes, the chicken salad. That certainly IS a thing (and probably the closest analogue to Fleischsalat that's available here). My bad. Seems like I can't help but offend someone, somewhere, even when I'm tried to make amends with others. Please excuse my careless oversight. I just don't eat that very often because honestly, it's not even half as good as Fleischsalat.