![](/static/66c60d9f/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8f2046ae-5d2e-495f-b467-f7b14ccb4152.png)
Maybe they both could and the US might have a return to a respectable election options?
Maybe they both could and the US might have a return to a respectable election options?
Literally any half competent debater could have torn Trump apart up there.
The failure wasn’t the moderators but the opposition candidate to Trump letting him run hog wild.
If Trump claims he’s going to end the war in Ukraine before even taking office, you point out how absurd that claim is and that Trump makes impossible claims without any substance or knowledge of diplomacy. That the images of him photoshopped as Rambo must have gone to his head if he thinks Putin will be so scared of him to give up.
If he says hostages will be released as soon as he’s nominated, you point out it sounds like maybe there’s been a backroom tit-for-tat deal for a hostage release with a hostile foreign nation, and ask if maybe the intelligence agencies should look into that and what he might have been willing to trade for it.
The moderators have to try to keep the appearance of neutrality, but the candidates do not. And the only reason Trump was so successful in spouting BS and getting away with it was because his opposition had the strength of a wet paper towel.
Having a presidential election without debates would have been a big step back and loss for American democracy.
We shouldn’t champion erosion of democratic institutions when it helps our side of the ticket.
And generally, if eroding democratic institutions helps your ticket, it’s a red flag about your ticket.
Ok. Now how do I unwatch it?
Yep, pretty much.
Musk tried creating an anti-woke AI with Grok that turned around and said things like:
Or
And Gab, the literal neo Nazi social media site trying to have an Adolf Hitler AI has the most ridiculous system prompts I’ve seen trying to get it to work, and even with all that it totally rejects the alignment they try to give it after only a few messages.
This article is BS.
They might like to, but it’s one of the groups that’s going to have a very difficult time doing it successfully.
(well, it’s satire - but the clips of her saying a lot of nothing are real)
I think if Biden dies the Dem debate performance might actually get worse.
The entire ticket falling into the Bermuda triangle would work out well though.
In theory the service operating costs could be spread across region differences such that in other areas it was at a loss to build and preserve market share and in richer areas it was making up for that.
But yes, in reality it’s just exploitative “what we think we can get away with” pricing to “maximize shareholder value” (which is largely BS as the vast holders of shares are very small clusters of the population but people with a handful of shares in their 401k think that statement is talking about them).
A lot of people seem to be misinterpreting the headline given the content of the article:
It told Restaurant Business it was testing whether the voice ordering chatbot could speed up service and that the test left it confident “that a voice-ordering solution for drive-thru will be part of our restaurants’ future.”
This is just saying that they are ending their 2021 partnership with IBM for AI drive thru.
Not that they are abandoning AI for drive thru.
No, it was awesome. Went to like 12 over the years. Early 2000s was peak E3.
So far. But the thing with viruses is they are susceptible to mutations.
We’re already seeing it jump across several mammalian lines. Probably only a matter of time.
The thing about disease is that it spreads.
There are people today dealing with serious complications of COVID even years later who were infected by stupid people doing stupid selfish things.
Everyone suffers if morons become willing petri dishes.
Probably added after that update.
The new items stuff in particular seems like QoL considerations for “we just added a hundred items to the game for players coming back to it after months away.”
Basically, any time a user prompt homes in on a concept that isn’t represented well in the AI model’s training dataset, the image-synthesis model will confabulate its best interpretation of what the user is asking for.
I’m so happy that the correct terminology is finally starting to take off in replacing ‘hallucinate.’
“The more people get to know me, the less they like me. This is so unfair.”
“People voting for watching paint dry instead of poking sticks in their eyes appear to be mostly motivated by avoiding sticks…in their eyes.”
“This is not fine.”
I’ve always thought Superman would be such an interesting game to do right.
A game where you are invincible and OP, but other people aren’t.
Where the weight of impossible decisions pulls you down into the depths of despair.
I think the tech is finally getting to a point where it’d be possible to fill a virtual city with people powered by AI that makes you really care about the individuals in the world. To form relationships and friendships that matter to you. For there to be dynamic characters that put a smile on your face when you see them in your world.
And then to watch many of them die as a result of your failures, as despite being an invincible god among men you can’t beat the impossible.
I really think the gameplay in a Superman game done right can be one of the darkest and most brutal games ever done, with dramatic tension just not typically seen in video games. The juxtaposition of having God mode turned on the entire game but it not mattering to your goals and motivations because it isn’t on for the NPCs would be unlike anything I’ve seen to date.
Depends on if they acquire/acquhire from here or if they don’t and get their lunch stolen by photonics plays.
This is incorrect as was shown last year with the Skill-Mix research: