> "Dumb beyond belief" doesn't perform at the gold-medal level at IMO.
Idiot savants are still idiots even though they are exceptional at some things. A person powered by an LLM and no human intelligence would absolutely be classified as an idiot savant.
Explain how entire subreddits full of humans have been fooled into talking to bots, then. If you tell an LLM to act like a human, that's what it will do.
For that matter — you might be talking to one now!
Are you a woman? If not you can't really judge it since it was intended for women, not being the target audience doesn't mean it was bad, women absolutely loved the movie.
In 1995 how many people used the internet in their daily work, of those that did how many was it a curiosity that maybe supplemented their existing business practice (sending a memo via email rather than post for example). Large companies were using large computer mainframes but the majority of employers - the SMEs - weren’t.
By 2005 it massively shifted, and AI seems to be coming faster than the internet and computers in general.
By 2015 non intenet companies were going the way of the dodo. How many travel agents were there per 100k in 1995 compared to 2015?
Also add in that these adoption rates are being enforced via threats of firing by bosses of workers. It's hardly something organic, there's a reason why the LLM companies are chasing lucrative corporate welfare contracts because consumers have soundly rejected this nonsense.
> If there is $270B in equity invested, making those 5% back should be rather straightforward for someone with that much wealth, a decent wealth manager would recoup that easily. Money makes money.
Its his voter shares, he wont get them back. Larry and Sergei currently control 51% of Google votes, if they sell any more they lose control of Google so they can't afford to sell.
Google is doing that, you know all those "I am not a robot" things? Those are made by google mostly and uses a lot of such signals. Its not just clicking the right things its also how you click etc.
The reason some of those just have a checkbox without a challenge is that they already are sure enough so how you move to click the box is enough then.
> You can't change or fix people who have their vote. Mental models are rigid, and people are, broadly speaking, emotional and irrational. They vote vibes, not facts. So, "what do?" as the kids would say.
So don't present a candidate with shit vibes that people wont vote for? Democrats lost this election, if they got as many votes as they usually do they would have won.
Democrats in power would rather lose the election than break down their own power structure, that is the main reason Trump could get re-elected.
You blame Democrats, I blame the people who voted for this and are shocked he did what he said he was going to do.
Mass deportation? Tariffs? Dismantling the government? Hate? All things he campaigned on. He is doing exactly what his voters were told he was going to do. Dems are going to win those votes? Unlikely, they’re not going to run a candidate that appeals to their values, which aren’t going to change.
> “He’s not hurting the people he needs to be”: a Trump voter says the quiet part out loud
A Trump voter hurt by the shutdown reveals the real reason the president attracts hardcore supporters.
> The president’s particular brand of identity politics — the racist attacks on blacks and Latinos, the Muslim ban, his cruel treatment of women — similarly depends on negative rather than positive appeals. Antoine Banks, a political psychologist at the University of Maryland, wrote a book on the connection between anger as an emotion and racial politics. When politicians gin up anger, an emotion that necessarily has a negative target, voters tend to think about the world in more racial (and racist) terms. Trump makes his voters angry, he centers that anger on hated targets, and that makes them want to take his side.
> This is what makes Trumpism work. This is the dark heart of our political moment. Even people who are tremendously vulnerable themselves, like Crystal Minton, support Trump because of his capacity to inflict pain on others they detest. The cruelty, as the Atlantic’s Adam Serwer says, is the point.
Well some people are stubborn but most do the switch to better designed items. So its not really subjective, the initial knee jerk reaction is but the more reasoned response after a few years isn't very subjective.
Why can't you write that? It is much more accurate than their own version since what they wrote is very suggestive while this is just describing what happened.
Idiot savants are still idiots even though they are exceptional at some things. A person powered by an LLM and no human intelligence would absolutely be classified as an idiot savant.
reply