Eh what blood got AFCIs in there? Green blood from Siemens and Eaton as far as I can tell

“hype” is literally media attention

hype
1)
: publicity
especially : promotional publicity of an extravagant or contrived kind
all the hype before the boxing match 

Merriam Webster

Mozilla executives are once again carrying water for Google.

If there is any doubt who they work for, watching them testify in defense of Google’s monopoly should be all you need.

They will edit Google Maps to show Canada and Greenland as part of the US, and Ukraine as part of Russia.

Historically Tesla’s security is as bad as DOGE’s. They got hacked a while back because they had an unsecured kubernetes control plane exposed to the internet. Apparently being owned by a [edit: seagull managing] drug addict isn’t good for opsec.

EDIT: I incorrectly used a medical term to describe Elon’s management style. Sorry everyone.

Don’t worry Tesla diamond hands: Trump will announce a “Strategic TSLA reserve buying scheme.”

Too many villains in our society, not enough heros.

the issue here is

The issue is Mozilla’s McKinsey CEO has decided to break the promise not to sell personal data.

If Firefox disappears. Mozilla isn’t Firefox, it’s the organization staffed with ad-tech and McKinsey ghouls and paid by Google to kill Firefox.

The equally hilarious thing is that currently they have the “never will” promise in the same codebase as the “definitely will” gated by a “TOU” flag, showing intent to violate the promise.

Well I’m not the ADL but yeah I’d say if, for instance, the NAACP decided that anti-black racism was equal to criticism of, say, Zimbabwe. And as long as a billionaire supported Zimbabwe’s government it’d be fine if he threw the white power sign at the presidential inauguration. That’s basically what you have with the ADL.

I wrote in “Palestine” for the president. It was the only option that wasn’t pro-genocide.

It’s a shame the ADL refused to call him what he is when it mattered: a nazi.

Musk doesn’t fit the ADL’s definition of anti-semite, which is anyone who opposes the State of Israel.

• Octopus: Antisemitic
• “Ok” hand gesture: Antisemitic
• Not buying a SodaStream: Antisemetic
• Nazi salute: Hey let’s not misinterpret this one!

Just going to leave this right here:

During the Cuban missile crisis Kennedy asked about using a tactical nuke against Cuba.

Kennedy’s generals explained that the only possible options would be enormous first strike against the USSR, or nothing. Because if the US used a tactical nuke Khrushchev would be forced to respond. Then you’d have a nuclear exchange between superpowers anyway, but would also be giving the enemy time to react.

Every time there’s an AI hype cycle the charlatans start accusing the naysayers of moving goalposts. Heck that exact same thing was happing constantly during the Watson hype. Remember that? Or before that the Alpha Go hype. Remember that?

I was editing my comment down to the core argument when you responded. But fundamentally you can’t make a machine think without understanding thought. While I believe it is easy to test that Watson or ChatGPT are not thinking, because you can prove it through counterexample, the reality is that charlatans can always “but actually” those counterexamples aside by saying “it’s a different kind of thought.”

What we do know because this at least the 6th time this has happened is that the wow factor of the demo will wear off, most promised use cases won’t materialize, everyone will realize it’s still just an expensive stochastic parrot and, well, see you again for the next hype cycle a decade from now.

just because any specific chip in your calculator is incapable of math doesn’t mean your calculator as a system is

It’s possible to point out the exact silicon in the calculator that does the calculations, and also exactly how it does it. The fact that you don’t understand it doesn’t mean that nobody does. The way a calculator calculates is something that is very well understood by the people who designed it.

By the way, this brings us to the history of AI which is a history of 1) misunderstanding thought and 2) charlatans passing off impressive demos as something they’re not. When George Boole invented boolean mathematics he thought he was building a mathematical model of human thought because he assumed that thought==logic and if he could represent logic such that he could do math on it, he could encode and manipulate thought mathematically.

The biggest clue that human brains are not logic machines is probably that we’re bad at logic, but setting that aside when boolean computers were invented people tried to describe them as “electronic brains” and there was an assumption that they’d be thinking for us in no time. Turns out, those “thinking machines” were, in fact, highly mechanical and nobody would look at a univac today and suggest that it was ever capable of thought.

Arithmetic was something that we did with our brains and when we had machines that could do it that led us to think that we had created mechanical brains. It wasn’t true then and it isn’t true now.

Is it possible that someday we’ll make machines that think? Perhaps. But I think we first need to really understand how the human brain works and what thought actually is.

There’s this message pushed by the charlatans that we might create an emergent brain by feeding data into the right statistical training algorithm. They give mathematical structures misleading names like “neural networks” and let media hype and people’s propensity to anthropomorphize take over from there.

Because everything we know about how the brain works says that it’s not a statistical word predictor.

LLMs have no encoding of meaning or veracity.

There are some great philosophical exercises about this like the chinese room experiment.

There’s also the fact that, empirically, human brains are bad at statistical inference but do not need to consume the entire internet and all written communication ever to have a conversation. Nor do they need to process a billion images of a bird to identify a bird.

Now of course because this exact argument has been had a billion times over the last few years your obvious comeback is “maybe it’s a different kind of intelligence.” Well fuck, maybe birds shit icecream. If you want to worship a chatbot made by a psycopath be my guest.