Except he was great.

Shut up and take my money!

I heard it has Sailfish. Maybe its just an option but not default?

Totally possible with an open standard. Do you have to tinker when you plug in a monitor? Not really. How about a mouse or any other peripheral device? Generally not beyond installing the app, which would be the same with a car.

Friction in the user experience has everything to do with lack of attention and time spent on that development goal, and nothing to do with it being open and standard.

Sure, but if practically all the visible applications of a tool are negative, the implement of harm and the harm itself are commingled.

I agree that machine learning tools have useful applications, but LLM tools only seem useful at solving problems we’ve already solved or could solve more responsibly with 1/100 the energy consumption, and those are the only ones anyone seems to have ever seen or heard of, and also the ones responsible for the drive to build these data centers that consume all our life-giving resources.

The LLM idea is not responsible for those decisions, but it does make them possible while doing nothing meaningful for anybody. It is not surprising to see people rail against something like that. It offers only downsides for them, their well-being, and their society.

deleted by creator

I think it is very much both. I think that many people being clubbed and beaten by this AI stick know that someone’s swinging it.

It is rhetorical because that answer is self-evident to many, but you are exactly right nonetheless. It is a major exhibit in the case of why companies must be regulated to act in the public interest, because every time we don’t, they pull this same rent-seeking crap without fail: the “sell me a hammer and charge me when I swing it” routine.

But they force me to pay for parts I can’t use without doing things I won’t and agreeing to things I don’t.

It’s glorious!

All of this leads back to an old rhetorical question I’ve often asked. Why the fuck isn’t the whole entertainment system and car connection just a standard touchscreen and communication protocol?

The fact that I need these proprietary patent-gated apps to use parts of my car, instead of just a driver that could work on any device with the right port, is overtly user-hostile.

Some disassembly required

The Turing test doesn’t account for state. LLMs, while they could pass that test, are idle when unprompted. They dont have a means of responding to any stimulus but those provided. If they were provided even a fraction of the stimuli provided to a real mind, they would rapidly consume all available system resources trying to respond, regardless of how many we could reasonably provide.

Also, they are fixed. LLMs do not change once put together, and only seem to based on a rolling context window they store based on their previous interactions with the subject. They cannot internalize any of that interaction to change their underlying model or its weights.

Because of these things, I believe it illustrates how the Turing test, while an important thought experiment, is incomplete regarding defining a thinking machine and the ethics surrounding it. If the machine is off if I’m not directing it and can’t functionally remember or experience anything, it can’t experience suffering or oppression or any of the things associated with its agency, freedom, or any of the philosophical underpinnings of what constitutes another entity.

I think that it is a potential benefit not to attract those types of developers. A growing body of evidence is showing that users of LLM tools suffer cognitively.

Its not, but it does beg a lot of reliability questions. Cars today have many single points of failure in the electrical system, and have made things like the turn signal dependent on them, as well. The old turn signal had about as few components as an electrical circuit could have. Today’s has all of those but one, then like 20 more in the form of the computer and CAN bus. This can be said for many, many functions in a modern car. If there were material benefits to the end-user, maybe there’d be an argument for the added order of magnitude in complexity, but there are not. You get a token amount more diagnostic information, wheelbarrows full of privacy invasion, dramatically increased cost, and poorer reliability.

This, multiplied by every system in the car that has been subjected to this Rube Goldberg, is why even the new shitboxes cost a year’s pay.

He also said “Covfefe”. I personally dont believe either one.

Unless they specifically say they don’t, they do.

I just dont see any useful results before then. For practically my whole life, the situation in the Middle-east has been unstable. It seems to me that the reason for this is because Israel has continually agitated its neighbors from behind a metaphorical force field provided by their larger international allies. The “force field” seems completely unearned, and is the result of diabolical lobbying/bribery and blackmail of powerful foreign politicians in the USA and elsewhere.

Until the circumstances change, I dont see a ton of reason to expect the conditions to, either. Moves will be made as always, but I expect more of this ineffectual war-play: retreat from hill today, re-take same hill tomorrow, repeat forever. All the while the waste and corruption in the military operations continue to flow.

I too hope for a return to prosperity for the Iranian people that I have seen from the 1970s and before, but I dont see that happening until the unconditional military pact with Israel starts getting some conditions.

Not the OP, but I think this issue will continue to rise in temperature until it is more heavily influential on US domestic politics. I believe at some point, support of Israel on these recent events will become politically suicidal, and slowly the compromised politicians rendered unable to break with Israel will get drummed out of office by primary or normal election.

Then, US will officially drop support and the math in the middle east gets a lot less complex for them.

I had thought all this time that he and others had never even publicly entertained the idea of breaking with Israel on policy due to a combination of a steady stream of bribes and a dossier of compromising information on many prominent figures with the implicit threat of intentional leak.

I guess we might be about to see if that was true!