Sorry, but when you say sluthdemon. The only thing i can think about is a demon that forces you to watch as it solves crime using deduction all the wile making you look too stupid to have solved it.

I don’t see the good in C.Y.A. When doing the damage right now… after all the horrors they get to snitch to try to dodge accountability, how expected of them.

I highly recommend it on a vr device if possible, but to everyone who has played it knows, it has its moments. But its not as wrote as a run of the mill horror game, i may have given the game a disservice labeling it as such.

Outerwilds is also a must play in vr,

If you got vr is best played that way. Best horror game on vr.

The wear on the steps say bottom

You say that but i appreciate their efforts. And wile i will understand and expect creators to work at their own pace, if only the algorithm wasn’t 100% momentum driven AND/OR i could just get front page notification when my subs post something, and didn’t just unsub me for not watching a video for a wile. I am an adult and can manage my own feeds

But is not zero

I am talking about the strength of addiction, from what i remember caffeine is more addictive, but the negative effects are less then that of alcohol, and easier to break.

Look you don’t even need to try that hard. Just invent energy vapes, work a brand deal with Red Bull, get that flavor in them and cram it full of caffeine. Some of the two nastiest addictions still legally distributable, they take separate fast tracks to the brain, and layer the buzz, they cover each others immediate draw backs, and ruin other competitors, as just a cigarette or just an energy drink will fail to fire both cannons at once, causing using either to condition a caffeine vape.

It will damn humanity to exploding hearts for the weakest willed, and life time devotion from everyone else. Just pure evil.

Hey! Each jork doesn’t count as a whole jerk’n!

Ironically, i am feeling attacked right now…

“How can this be! What a cruel twist of fate… And isn’t it like 9PM!? Oh… fucking daylight savings!”

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XQbPaBRvaJw&pp=ygUeQ2hhb3RpYyBnb29kIEJhcmJhZGlhbiB2c21waXJl

You mean when the training data becomes more complete. But that’s the thing, when this issue was being tested, the’AI’ would swear up and down that the normally filled wine glasses were full, when it was pointed out that it was not indeed full, the ‘AI’ would agree, and change some other aspect of the picture it didn’t fully understand. You got wine glasses where the wine would half phase out of the bounds of the cup. And yet still be just as empty. No amount of additional checks will help without an appropriate reference

I use ‘AI’ extensively, i have one running locally on my computer, i swap out from time to time. I don’t have anything against its use with certain exceptions. But i can not stand people personifying it beyond its scope

Here is a good example. I am working on an APP so every once in a wile i will send it code to check. But i have to be very careful. The code it spits out will be unoptimized like: variable1=IF (variable2 IS true, true, false) .

Some have issues with object permanence, or the consideration of time outside its training data. Its like saying a computer can generate a true random number, by making the function to calculate a number more convoluted.

I mean, they can assume fantasy, and it will hold weight because laws are interpreted by the court, not because the court is correct.

“it was unable to link the concepts until it was literally created for it to regurgitate it out“

-WraithGear

The’ problem was solved before their patch. But the article just said that the model is changed by running it through a post check. Just like what deep seek does. It does not talk about the fundamental flaw in how it creates, they assert if does, like they always did

1 it’s not full, but closer then it was.

2. I specifically said that the AI was unable to do it until someone specifically made a reference so that it could start passing the test so it’s a little bit late to prove much.

Yes, on the second part. Just rearranging or replacing words in a text is not transformative, which is a requirement. There is an argument that the ‘AI’ are capable of doing transformative work, but the tokenizing and weight process is not magic and in my use of multiple LLM’s they do not have an understanding of the material any more then a dictionary understands the material printed on its pages.

An example was the wine glass problem. Art ‘AI’s were unable to display a wine glass filled to the top. No matter how it was prompted, or what style it aped, it would fail to do so and report back that the glass was full. But it could render a full glass of water. It didn’t understand what a full glass was, not even for the water. How was this possible? Well there was very little art of a full wine glass, because society has an unspoken rule that a full wine glass is the epitome of gluttony, and it is to be savored not drunk. Where as the reference of full glasses of water were abundant. It doesn’t know what full means, just that pictures of full glass of water are tied to phrases full, glass, and water.

It can, the only thing stopping it is if it is specifically told not to, and this consideration is successfully checked for. It is completely capable of plagiarizing otherwise.

If a human did that it’s still plagiarism.

If what you are saying is true, why were these ‘AI’s” incapable of rendering a full wine glass? It ‘knows’ the concept of a full glass of water, but because of humanities social pressures, a full wine glass being the epitome of gluttony, art work did not depict a full wine glass, no matter how ai prompters demanded, it was unable to link the concepts until it was literally created for it to regurgitate it out. It seems ‘AI’ doesn’t really learn, but regurgitates art out in collages of taken assets, smoothed over at the seams.