Steven_T_Baxter

joined 3 weeks ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

The veges can wait. It's hero time! (Its hard finding good help these days. Maybe reaching outside the box is your best option?)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

Compare with Zangi Private Messenger. Yes, every country who has jurisdiction has access. Just ask yourself, which gov do I trust more with my private chats?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm on Lemmy because Reddit devs are letting their AI auto-ban their more intelligent users. Isn't that similar to letting Telsa's auto-drive into an auto-accident?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

🤷‍♂️Ah, policies come and go....like the wind, right?😉Maybe the smarter thing we can do, until they get their priorities in line with ours, is to put up our own wind turbines, or whatever else is more abundant, and don't ask anybody to bill us. 💪⚡✊

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Good to see France bringing this creativity to AI evolution. Check it out: https://chat.mistral.ai/chat

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

Yes, females are at least half our nation's thinking power. Lets do all we can to bring these girls up to speed and restore balance to the force.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

A very good article, highly recommended! The first step to thinking outside of the box is building outside of the box.💪

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

If it is something to believe in, then it is not Science.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

I don't mind training AI to give everyone smarter answers. It just seems the more civic, community minded, thing to do. BUT, what I want is a % of the revenue they make selling my metadata, and a list of who they sold it to.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Not sure if all the advanced reasoning in the world can actually find missing information, can it? So, at best, it can only make an educated leap of logic across the gap of information. But shouldn't people be first alerted that such gaps have been found, and then make a call of action to find it? Otherwise, it just seems making up missing info is only going to generate the same kind of questionable material we are trying to get rid of. Wouldn't it be smarter to just use more caution? Forget auto-deletion (too much like "auto-drive"), just highlight (or lowlight) the questionable material, AND then maybe copy it over to its own "Encyclopedia of Errors A-Z". Just my idea. But, what do you think?