…How are they able to continue providing these but not maintain the Bridge Access Program for the uninsured? 🤨

Covert? Isn’t India one of few countries consistently and unabashedly trading with Russia? Is this covert in the open secrets sense?

I haven’t paid interest in over a decade and have made thousands from rewards.

I’m not too familiar with credit cards, do you mean this in a literal money sense or something more complex, i.e. the value of rewards & money?

I had been publishing articles on my own website since 2003, but I did that mostly manually by writing whole HTML pages.

Huh, so literally raw html? I know it’s not too difficult, but I have wondered occasionally how many small websites may have been written that way.

Does it sometimes seem like commenting in high traffic online spaces feels this way too, not just Reddit?

For those interested in discussing their job searches, did you know there’s a [email protected] community? Not terribly active at the moment, but given the discussion here there seems to be some potential interest

Fun part is, that article cites a paper mentioning misgivings with the terminology: AI Hallucinations: A Misnomer Worth Clarifying. So at the very least I’m not alone on this.

Yeah, on further thought and as I mention in other replies, my thoughts on this are shifting toward the real bug of this being how it’s marketed in many cases (as a digital assistant/research aid) and in turn used, or attempted to be used (as it’s marketed).

perception

This is the problem I take with this, there’s no perception in this software. It’s faulty, misapplied software when one tries to employ it for generating reliable, factual summaries and responses.

It’s not a bad article, honestly, I’m just tired of journalists and academics echoing the language of businesses and their marketing. “Hallucinations” aren’t accurate for this form of AI. These are sophisticated generative text tools, and in my opinion lack any qualities that justify all this fluff terminology personifying them.

Also frankly, I think students have one of the better applications for large-language model AIs than many adults, even those trying to deploy them. Students are using them to do their homework, to generate their papers, exactly one of the basic points of them. Too many adults are acting like these tools should be used in their present form as research aids, but the entire generative basis of them undermines their reliability for this. It’s trying to use the wrong tool for the job.

You don’t want any of the generative capacities of a large-language model AI for research help, you’d instead want whatever text-processing it may be able to do to assemble and provide accurate output.

When I wrote “processing”, I meant it in the sense of getting to that “shape” of an appropriate response you describe. If I’d meant this in a conscious sense I would have written, “poorly understood prompt/query”, for what it’s worth, but I see where you were coming from.

(AI confidently BSing)

Isn’t it more accurate to say it’s outputting incorrect information from a poorly processed prompt/query?

Why do tech journalists keep using the businesses’ language about AI, such as “hallucination”, instead of glitching/bugging/breaking?

…Does anyone have data on how many people still use checks?

Have you seen Publii yet? Dunno how well it works on Linux, but there’s a version for Linux as well.

Is this ever noted in any of the documentation, outside of some fine print, with the printer to let someone know that it’s being done? If your product is secretly leaving indicators for anyone aware of the indicators to track your actions in some way, that’s problematic in my opinion.

Given a printer is arguably a lesser issue anymore, but the same idea applies with other tech.

Isn’t this simply a contrivance to uphold a questionable system?

I just hope this pointless move won’t bring down the wayback machine.

What was the pointless move you’re referring to?

Sorry, I should have been clearer, as I wasn’t aiming to suggest it was a genetic trait. As another commenter indicated below, as well as another in this thread, I was asking in relation to the upbringing perspective.

Although I’m well aware upbringing isn’t brainwashing, and so even those anti-abortion parents couldn’t prevent their children from being for bodily autonomy, but I thought it worth asking about to see what others might think. If you read through some conservative leaning texts, some of them unambiguously talk about having children for the express purpose of perpetuating their beliefs, so at least some will view this trend as in their favor.

Also to be completely clear here: I’m pro-choice, and for bodily autonomy.

Won’t this potentially contribute to an increasing population of people supportive of, or otherwise apathetic about, abortion restrictions, supposing those taking this course are largely against abortion restrictions?