Promethiel

I’m with you. My concern is that I haven’t yet figured out how it’s gonna be ruined for private consumers by corporate consumers yet, so can’t know how to prepare lol.

I mean. You don’t have to wonder forever… 🍴🧼

I don’t particularly think it’s a better change, but CloudFlare is thinking of other options, and with how widespread their use is, if they start doing it, so will everyone else:

https://blog.cloudflare.com/monetization-gateway/

Fuckers took that into account. A pull out leaves that side of the contraband network still functional, as it does after every pull-out from any CIA operation.

The actual military might be peeved, but probably be secretly glad they don’t have to pretend to police their troops on leave from also eating the Japanese crayons and committing heinous crimes.

Pokemon, Mario, the IPs of some relevance yet for the youth. Which US alphabet soup agency do you suppose put their use forward? It may be as infuriating as if it was ‘just for the lols’, but it absolutely isn’t just for the lols.

The entire thing is part of the currently ongoing digital offshoot of COINTELPRO.

That’s also some of us before our stimulant medication kicks in. I swear to fuck, if I get called AI one more time…

That’s the goal.

Progress is trying to march in that direction. It’s just subtly (I.e, not something PopSci usually covers) one of the hardest scientific undertakings of our time.

I also don’t feel as though neither enough attention nor funding is being directed that way currently.

Yes. after it reaches a certain point of maturity. Gene editing hasn’t.

Ethics are a big hurdle, but I wouldn’t call it the biggest. Mengele was a conscienceless monster who played at pseudo science.

The biggest hurdle to gene editing is that it’s fucking hard. Even Mengele V2.0 with no morals and a stable of daily test subjects wouldn’t lead to a ‘mastery’ that lets you merely select for your changes to only include digesting lignin and cellulose.

Seriously. It’s really hard to even model within acceptable error margins, what the results of gene therapy will be. The potential for disastrous results also only goes up the more complex the interactions you’re trying to affect.

At current time, even some of the best recorded attempts which are decidedly positively quality of life altering (e.g. [emphasis mine] https://www.science.org/content/article/gene-editing-therapy-made-just-6-months-helps-baby-life-threatening-disease) still come with great caveats:

The boy, first treated in February at just 7 months old, still needs a special diet and medication; the experimental therapy alone isn’t enough to prevent a dangerous buildup of ammonia in his blood caused by a faulty gene for a key liver enzyme. Still, the swift development of a gene editor that appears to have repaired the defect in some of his liver cells is a landmark demonstration of a personalized approach that has tantalized rare disease researchers.

Meanwhile, even renowned institutions starting from best intentions, get it horribly wrong, because the interactions are just that hard to model (e.g. [emphasis mine] https://www.science.org/content/article/exclusive-death-girl-chinese-gene-editing-trial-was-never-made-public):

That vague language glossed over tragedy: Seven days after the girl’s medical team infused trillions of viruses carrying the recipe for the base editor into her spinal fluid, she died of a severe immune reaction linked to the therapy, Science and Retraction Watch can now reveal.

In a possible future, itself perhaps locked in to some other timeline, your dreams may be possible for your grandchildren and great-grandchildren. But today, they’re just as likely to get you dead.

Can’t we identify the genes responsible for their stomach formation

Absolutely.

and CRISPR them unto humans, theoretically giving them the same abilities?

Absolutely not.

CRISPR and related techniques are not magic. The interplay between gene presence and trait expression is absurdly more complicated than that. You cannot simply “edit in” entire biological adaptations, that’s not how it works.

The most likely scenario in such an attempt would simply be nothing. Other possibilities include: Autoimmune lifelong digestive system issues, and death, amongst many others.

In other words, you’re arguing that their usage without discernment is detrimental.

Cory agrees on this very same article, and it also includes the same nuance this chain is trying to give voice to:

The other question Suresh implicitly raises is: “How can you reconcile the failure of AI in the enterprise with the individual claims of skilled technologists who insist that AI is helping them do great work?” The answer is that these AI users are “centaurs” – experienced workers who are assisted by automation on terms that they set for themselves.

Thanks to their skill and experience, these workers possess discernment, the ability to tell good code from bad, and (more importantly) good uses of code-generation tools from bad. They demonstrate the adage that worker-driven automation improves quality, while capital-driven automation improves throughput.

We wouldn’t be having this conversation if LLMs had been given the chance to grow into being the same way the web did. Whereas we would be having this same conversation with the letters swapped if corporations were the ones to spawn the WWW instead of the way it came about.

The reason is the same. There is only one war.

The glaring “floaty” physics is amateur tell hour, I’m actually surprised it’s even still an artifact. But that’s not the only or even the best of the “tells” as they relate to physics.

Probability, consistency, and continuity are always going to be issues present to some degree for one simple fact:

A camera takes a snapshot of the actual physical universe. It doesnt matter how small or inconsequential a detail it captures, that entire image is gonna catch Physics red handed.

An AI generation is making up everything, all the laws and rules. Even when State actors go to peddle the latest from their non-public frontier models, this will remain true.

Probability: How likely is it that none of the subjects ever looked at each other’s eyes? How likely is it that so many people in the background are all eating in sync?

Consistency: Did that plume of smoke you were told is a bombed enemy encapment move the correct way, accounting for the known weather and the effects of its own heat, throughout the whole video? Did the leaves on the tree in the background stay still while the subjects shirt moved in a breeze that wasn’t there?

Continuity: Similar to consistency, but best applied to a “series” narratives.

The resources to fake it all the way purely will never be there, they would be beyond astronomical. The human editing needed to seal in those gaps takes some time.

The lies are needed faster than they can be made detection proof.

It literally is a box full of mosquitoes lol.

Researchers do stick their hands in, and they absolutely breathe because the enclosures can be used to selectively control the air exchange and you sometimes need to elicit a response.

You’re correct that mosquitoes find us in big part by detecting the co2 we expel during respiration.

The bastards, the only way to avoid them is when you stop breathing.