A great auto-battler released just this year named The Gnorp Apologue!

Your role is relatively passive, but a little time investment is required for progress.

It’s really just the DMCA.

This kind of faultless takedown shouldn’t be legal, but the DMCA carved it out decades ago.

Russians will be granted amnesty because of their willingness to accept our deportations into their labor camps.

I use various models on a daily basis (as a software/infrastructure developer), and can say that the reason they are able to sell AI is that it’s really useful.

Like any tool, you have to work with its strengths and weaknesses, and it’s very much a matter of “shit in, shit out.”

For example, it can easily get confused with complicated requests, so they must be narrowly focused. Breaking large problems down into smaller ones is a normal part of problem solving, so this doesn’t detract from its utility.

Also, it sometimes just makes shit up, so it’s absolutely necessary to thoroughly test everything it outputs. Test-driven development has been around for a long time, so that’s not really a problem either.

It’s more of a booksmart intern assistant than a professional software engineer, but used in this way it’s a great productivity booster.

A companion generator for God.

oddly enough, there are models trained to generate different angles of a given scene!

you’re right about the importance of trust. leveraging and scaling interpersonal trust is the key to consensus.

I’m already benefiting from it on a daily basis, and I’m neither of those people.

Capitalists will always capitalize, but that doesn’t necessarily negate usefulness. On the contrary, by some estimates llama3 cost nearly $1B to develop, yet it’s free on huggingface for anyone to download and use.

I’m not trying to argue with you.

It seemed that you were trying to make sense of the gun nut mindset. Gun nuts do indeed think firearm ownership is a fundamental human right, so considering it as such is necessary to understand their perspective.

If you really want to understand their perspective, consider an analogous argument involving some other fundamental human right, ideally one that you strongly support.

An easy one is free speech. Many countries without this right believe it is dangerous and stupid, using a litany of rational assertions and examples to justify themselves.

Consider all of the harm caused by people spreading lies and propaganda. The right to free speech ensures the most evil ideas and people can utilize our most powerful social constructs to attack the very foundations that a stable society depends on. etc…

Every right can be abused, and likewise an argument can be formulated against them based on their potential for abuse. Those that support some right typically believe the benefits outweigh the costs.

Hope this helps.

preach borther!