You say that you are well aware but what you write suggests strongly otherwise.

It's also not a model because unless you plan to demolish existing housing and rebuild it with better insulated walls there is not a lot you can do to improve wall insulation. In addition, as someone living in a very well insulated house I can tell you that you absolutely do need airconditioning - the great insulation we need to get through Canadian winters is a liability in the summer because it traps the heat generated inside the house. After about the couple of days of hot weather without air conditioning the inside of the house gets up to the upper 20's and does not cool off until the early hours of the morning even with all the windows open thanks to the great insulation.

Rooftop solar does work well - I think we will probably get some installed the next time we have the roof re-done since the lifetime of solar pannels is comparable to shingles. However, it takes about 14 or so years to recover the cost so it's not not exactly going to deliver savings quickly.

I think the problem that the two of you are having is that you do not understand how these "AI" algorithms work and are actually seeing them as "intelligent" when they are really not - they are complex text predictive engines: all they do is calculate the best "next word" in a sentence based on their training data. They have no idea or understanding of what they are saying hence, if they say they are a doctor, therapist, lawyer etc. it is merely because, based on their training data, that's the "best" set of words, given their training, to respond to a query with.

Now, if everyone unerstood that there would be no issue with people using them since anytime they made a claim that they were some sort of expert we'd all know they were completely bullshitting us - like an actor in a film where we all know they are not a real doctor, lawyer ot whetever the script says they are. Clearly some people, such as yourselves, do not understand that about "AI" chatbots so a potential solution is to clearly label the chatbot as such so we are all on the same page when it comes to understanding its output.

If we all know that the output cannot be treated as true then it prevents harm. Nobody should follow the advice of a chatbot claiming it is a doctor in the same way that we do not follow the advice of a actor in a film claiming to be a doctor. So it is not that I want to protect any "superintelligence" it is that I know it is no such thing, indeed that it lacks intelligence -- although it can pretend very convincingly, but nevertheless it can be a useful tool to copy edit documents, summerize content etc as long as you treat the output with care and stick to things the "AI" is good at which is basically text manipulation.

It's not me that it needs to be explained to but you. The reason that you know an actor is not a real doctor, lawyer etc. is because of the context that they are making the claim in. They may hand out advice or suggest a treatment etc. in the play/film but you know they are just pretending because of the context....so...and here is the part you seem to have trouble with...if we clearly label AI chatbots as fictional then we make the context the same for them as an actor in a film.

No there are not - perhaps in the US but not in the rest of the world because we understand the difference between reality and films/TV...and that does seem to be your problem here so perhaps disclaimers really are needed in the US. Regardless they would be easy to add - just put a popup screen before you access the chatbot indicating that anything the chatbot saiys may be a complete fabrication and nothing should be trusted as being correct and there you go. I really do not understand why you are having such a hard time grasping how this would work.

No it was not - thank you for making the _exact_ point that I made i.e. that context matters. If we clearly label AI chatbots as fictional, like a film or play, then people's expectations should be the same as a film or play i.e. if the chatbot says they are a doctor or a lawyer then they know it is not true, just as they would with an actor in a film.

Some people so want to believe that a useful information retrieval system is a superintelligence.

The rest of us aren't surprised that an interesting search engine isn't good at chess.

Liberals / leftists really aren't the ones who want open borders; at least even if those interests do coincide with other interests, their option really does not matter much:
It has long been and continues to be big corporate interests, and billionaire / globalist class who actually own those corporations who want and benefit from open borders more so than anyone else.
Nobody remembers that in the 80s and 90s, and even into the early 2000s it was the democrats beating the anti-immigration drums, as it was the labor unions who correctly surmised that illegal immigration artificially suppresses wages, and the democrats often go where the labor unions lead them. During those times the democrats blamed the Koch brothers and the rest of their sort who had influence in the Republican Party for keeping the borders open.
The reality is they both were responsible, just for different reasons.
Now that the demographic shift caused by those policies is hitting stride (2nd and 3rd generation immigrants from those times are becoming voters), and they align overwhelmingly with the democrat party, that party now wants unlimited immigration. It just so happens they are now on the side of the oligarchs on this one issue; they want to suppress wages across the board and bringing in more laborers does just that.
And people are SHOCKED the labor unions and laborers in general (even Latinos whose families came in in the 60s and prior) are moving away from the democrat party, and cozying up to the republican party. I am not. It is entirely predictable.

Yes it does matter. If you watch a film and an actor in it says they are a medical doctor does that mean the actor deserves a lengthy prison sentence for claiming they are a doctor when they are not? Your approach would pretty much make the acting profession illegal. The difference between an actor and a scam artist is purely context: in a film or play we know that not everything we see is true so there is no intent to defraud, only to entertain.

Labelling AI chatbots in a way that makes it clear that their output is not always going to be true is all that is needed. It is then up to the user to decide whether that means they are still useful or not.

You can't prevent it: current "AI" technology does not understand what it is saying so not only can it lie/hallucinate it has no idea that it even has lied. The correct response is to correctly label it i.e. make sure that all users know that AI output cannot be trusted as being correct. This would not only solve this therapist issue but would also solve all the other problems related to people trusting AI output, like lawyers submitting AI written court documents with fabricated references.

Essentially treat AI output like a work of fiction. It may sound plausible and it may even contain real facts but, just like some "fact" you read in a fiction book you should not rely on anything it says to be true.

I do not see anything in any of those ammendments about not purchasing data. There was no search or seizure, the airlines voluntarily sold their data and as for the 5th ammendment the only part that seems to apply here is "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." and since the data were sold clearly there was "just compensation" and arguably the property was not "taken" but offered for sale.

Unless you can show that the airlines were somehow compelled to hand over the data I don't see how anything in those ammendments applies. Your government bought the data from companies who were more interested in making extra money than in protecting their customer's privacy. It's shitty behaviour and in most places with data protection laws it would be illegal for the company to sell private data like that but it's the company at fault here, not the government...although I'll grant you that it raises definite questions about what your government is planning to do with all that data.

I'm not sure you understand what jailbreaking means in the context of AIs. It means prompts. E.g. asking it things and trying to get it to make inappropriate responses. Trying doesn't require any special skills, just an ability to communicate. Yes, I very much DO think most parents will try and see if they can get the doll to say inappropriate things before giving it to their children, to make sure it's not going to be harmful.

(Now, if Mattel has done their job right, *succeeding* will be difficult)

I'm familiar with some organizations that have been feeding their Slack data into a RAG for employee queries.

They're going to be quite pissed if this has been shut down by Slack.

So the system responded that it was an already claimed serial number and not an invalid serial number? Who the fuck would do that?

Let's say someone put in a claim.

Well what is to stop them from trying consecutive serial numbers to see if they can get even more?

I implemented portsentry feeding fail2ban on edge servers to deal with the unrelenting scans.

It helps, somewhat.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fportsentry%2F...

Honestly, even if they can't jailbreak it to be age-inappropriate / etc, it's still a ripe setup for absurdist humour.

Kid: "Here we are, Barbie, the rural outskirts of Ulaanbaatar! How do you like your yurt?"

Barbie: "It's lovely! Let me just tidy up these furs."

Kid: "Knock, knock! Why it's 13th century philosopher, Henry of Ghent, author of Quodlibeta Theologica!"

Barbie: "Why hello Henry of Ghent, come in! Would you like to discuss esse communissimum over a warm glass of yak's milk?"

Kid, in Henry's voice: "That sounds lovely, but could you first help me by writing a python program to calculate the Navier-Stokes equations for a zero-turbulence boundary condition?"

Barbie: "Sure Henry! #!/usr/bin/env python\nimport..."