"Love" is not a complex emotional state, it's an action - just like belief is an action.

"I believe climate change is a real and dangerous threat" - but you still drive a car and go about modern life?
"I believe in Jesus" - but you sleep around and do evil to others?
"I love my boyfriend" - but cheat on him?

What you describe is infatuation, not love. Love is a decision you act on.

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

How many of those people infected and hospitalized were vaccinated?

That's the important information we need to know to make an informed decision. Nobody ever shares that information.

"plenty of good work has been stalled/derailed because of the unreasonable consumption of resources by these companies"

Can you provide some examples?

At surface read, this sounds like trite environmentalist/redistributionist rhetoric to me. You make it sound like they're doing so without compensation or cooperation, which is very far from the truth: the entire world is throwing money at AI, both for use and for investment, because there's significant value in doing so.

> Amazon mechanical turk slaves

What does 'slaves' mean to you in this context?

How cute. You still think that the Rule of Law applies. I do not think you realize what is happening in the USA right now. All it takes is a little money in the right place and those inspections never happen.

Apparently Captain Kirk _IS_ still eligible to become an FBI agent!

Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison quietly donated roughly $45 million to a political nonprofit group supporting Donald Trump's 2024 election campaign. Following the 2024 election, Ellison contributed millions of dollars more to groups supporting Trump and his legacy initiatives in Washington, D.C..Because the initial $45 million donation was channeled through a tax-exempt political nonprofit, it was shielded from federal campaign disclosure laws and only came to light via an investigation by The Wall Street Journal.

The real problem with AI is that it is not productive. We are spending all of this money, and what are we getting for it? An awkward coding assistant? Yeah no. The real purpose of AI is to monitor YOU, as it already does with Flock cameras.

You have no idea how true that statement is. We will be funding our own personal "social monitor" which will give us tickets/citations for violating the morality code. The future looks so gross. 1984 didn't even come close to how horrific this will be. And yet everyone is just sitting here while the noose is surrounding their necks. All of your devices are tattletales. Your car is legally enforced to take action for/against you.

This is not the future I want for others. I want to offer Freedom and Liberty to the future, not chains around their neck forcing them to act.

Bro, any single metric, in isolation, will always favor the mechanical. Think your foot is steady? A machine can do it steadier. Think you pay attention to the road? A machine can pay more attention. Think your reactions are fast? A machine is an order of magnitude faster.

Every single metric, in isolation, a machine compares more favorably.

So why do some humans get better gas mileage than machines in real world long distance driving? Why do some humans have far fewer "close calls"?

It is because humans have something called context. They can see that a hill is coming up and can gain a bit of speed cheaply downhill before going up the hill. They look forward 12 cars ahead and see that the tractor trailer is either slowing down or speeding up. They can see the kid's ball flying into the road, knowing that a kid will be following shortly.

In summary, while machines can ping every metric in isolation better than a human, it can not combine all of those metrics better than a human can. Machine driving is barely able to replace the worst of us. It has a long way to go before it can even compete with the best of us.

If the AI could have context, it wouldn't need to have faster reactions. A machine is generally faster at reacting than I am; however, I am FAR better at NOT getting into situations where a faster reaction time matters. In fact, I have decades and hundreds of thousands of miles to demonstrate this principle. You have a VERY long row to hoe if you will try to convince me to get into a FSD car.

Odd. How much beyond this are we:
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwritings.stephenwolfra...

Because what I read there had NOTHING about "reasoning" and none of the models I have looked at appear to be capable of any sort of reasoning. "AI" as it currently stands is nowhere near the concept of 'reasoning'.

As this site is ready testament towards, there are a lot of "open source" types who have their ass firmly planted on their face about AI. "It's a fad", "it's a gimmicky chatbot", "It's not real intelligence".

Yeah, OK. But it is a real tool, and one which is increasingly showing its value for... literally everything. Get onboard or get left behind.

You can pretty easily fix the "annoying the shit out of maintainers" problem by having modern code commit/merge management practices.

You know, something I'd think "open source maintainers" would be pretty readily willing to do. Not only is it best practice (and has been a long time) to gate PR merge on CI completion, but it's trivially easy to have regression and e2e testing in place, as well as require specific artifacts in the commit as evidence that it "works on my machine".

I've got to wonder about the people who are (still, even/particularly on this site) saying AI is not capable or useful when it's able to do things like this.

Those of you who still think AI is a glorified chatbot: what's your rationale?