The author says they want freedom, but demands restrictions. They can't just make their own decision, they need to live everyone else's life too. This is part of a sustained attack on all internet users. They give multiple rationales.

Thousands of similar articles amount to brainwashing. The public is inundated with a false reality.

People like this claim to be injured by infinite scrolling, there is no way to have a consistent standard with claims that are so frivolous.

I expect a pile of down votes... my account is already tanked for similar reason. More manipulation of social media by people who claim to abhor it.

A simple solution is to use a system of linear equations. Each row of a matrix is a linear equation, Ax = b Each row contains kernel weightings A across the image X, B is the blurred pixel color. The full matrix would be a terabyte, so take advantage of the zeros and use an efficient solve for X instead of inversion.

Enhance really refers to combining multiple images. (stacking) Each pixel in a low res image was a kernel over the same high res image. So undoing a 100 pixel blur is equivalent to combining 10,000 images for 100x super resolution.

validating twice is safe. it will not error the second time.

it is against the rules to call someone dumb on this server.

Comments, however …

;-)

It's not enough to be against Amazon. You need to be against everyone who - sells tech to the gov, - undercuts prices, - exploits employees, - lobbies for regulation.

Not to mention the real reason we hate Jeff Bezos. Because you wouldn't like it if I mentioned it.

I give up. What's the real reason you hate Bezos?

Why are partial solutions unacceptable?

Humans can also make mistakes. This is the first test I apply every time. Could it be that AI is actually more capable than a human? If industry decides than humans are more reliable, they will choose to use humans. Reliability is part of cost-effectiveness, and it's built in to the business decision process.

A human would only make up an answer like the ones in the article if it were a compulsive liar. A human would ideally say "I don't know" or at worst employ the "I'll confirm that and circle back" corpspeak evasion.

Another case of badly computed reputational loss.

That context is not of "this more than that" comparisons, but of threshold: the service must be _adequate_.

If you don't have random humans capable of providing the needed service, find them. Do not employ random agents.

The average Google user expects LLMs to be perfect and treats their responses as answer from an oracle, not just better than the average human.

It doesn't matter whether it's better than humans, the one thing that matters are the consequences of its widespread use.

Focusing on the "worst ever" is sociopathic. These people do not want entertainment at all, they have a completely foreign agenda.

This person invented a new word to describe how OUR tech-savvy culture is lacking. This new word 'receptivity' is probably synonymous with gullibility. See how I used quotes for a quotation and not for emphasis? And fewer have it than ever before... really ? did someone measure it? Psychology is pseudoscience again.... How can I measure receptivity? Its a made up word! How can I measure it... This is a tech website... please go away. We LIKE tech, we don't want your brainwashing pseudoscience!

I'm unable to register. This is GME stonks all over again. It takes less than 1 second to process an account. There are 18,000 seconds in five hours. There must be a lot of comments that they don't agree with. Maybe they shut it down to protect humanity from extinction?