I have two chimps within, Laziness and Hyperactivity. They smoke cigs, drink yerba, fling shit at each other, and devour the face of anyone who gets close to either.
They also devour my dreams.
Lemmy has Reddit. PieFed has Lemmy.
Also, from 4chan’s PoV, Reddit is more like a boogerman than a boogeyman: it’s that weirdo creepo that makes you say “eew”, avoid at all costs, and if you touch them by accident or social pressures (“why no handshake?”), you immediately wash your hands.
Instead the actual boogeymen are internal: for /g/ it’s /a/, for /b/ and /int/ it’s /pol/, and for almost everyone else it’s /b/.
I’m trying to parse it.
In case it helps anyone here, the Unicode for his text is 𓇍𓇋𓏭𓂻 𓍘𓇋𓇾𓂋𓇥𓂋𓈐𓆑. I think the first four hieroglyphs are supposed to be read as /ji:/, roughly “yee”; I think they encode /j/, /i/, [lengthens the preceding vowel], [determinant for movement].
That explains it - they’re most likely doing it with OpenAI.
…I’m low-key wishing the bubble bursts before SoftBank is able to cash out.
“This should not be seen, in our view, as a cautious or negative stance on Nvidia, but rather in the context of SoftBank needing at least $30.5bn of capital for investments in the Oct-Dec quarter, including $22.5bn for OpenAI and $6.5bn for Ampere,” Rolf Bulk, equity research analyst at New Street Research, told CNBC.
When I read that, I was puzzled; when the bubble bursts, OpenAI will be way more affected than nVidia, as the later is basically the guy selling shovels in the gold rush. And odds are SoftBank’s CEO knows it; so why are they moving its investments this way?
Then I remembered this often quoted excerpt from The 18te Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte applies here: “Hegel remarks somewhere that all great world-historic facts and personages appear, so to speak, twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.”
The “first time” here is the dotcom bubble, often compared with the current AI bubble. When the internet was becoming popular, you had that flood of dotcom businesses with overpriced stocks, stocks went brrr then kaboom, bursting around early '00. Like this:
Note however how sharply the prices raised in '99. I think SoftBank is betting on that: buy stocks, sell them juuuuust before the bubble bursts, and you got some nice profit.
Here’s the open letter. I also recommend people to read what Wikipedia says about her, and take your own conclusions.
“We are not predicting human-level AI next year,” a Commission spokesperson told Euractiv in response to the scientists’ open letter, arguing that AI is developing faster and less predictably than older forecasts had suggested.
“This is about being prepared, not declaring a date,” they added. “Responsible planning is not guessing the future, it’s preparing for different scenarios.”
CUT OFF THE CRAP. Even if we interpret her statement as a figure of speech, she still fucked it up. She is a politician dammit; it’s part of her job to be careful with the shit she says.
I wonder if Gaius is the otter’s name, or if he was mocking someone called Gaius and saying he was otter-like.
You got me curious, so I checked it.
I downloaded this wordlist with 479k words, and used find+replace to count four strings: cie, cei, ie, ei. Here’s the result:
ie vs. 5649 (25%) eicie (74%) vs. 302 cei (26%)So the basic rule (i before e) holds some merit, but the “except after c” part is bullshit - it’s practically the same distribution.
Of course, this takes all words as equiprobable; results would be different if including the odds of a word appearing in the text into the maths.
Lukewarm.
If I can install the program from a .deb I’ll do it, even if it’s outdated in comparison with the flatpak version. But if there’s only a flatpak version I’ll use it.
It’s a general pattern someone noticed and then rhymed, that ⟨ie⟩ is more likely to appear than ⟨ei⟩ in English, except after ⟨c⟩. But it is not a real rule, there’s no orthographic restriction behind that pattern, not even an underlying phonemic reason. So you’re bound to see exceptions everywhere, to the point the pattern is useless as a mnemonic.
I made Siegfrieda a cardboard tank:
She loved it.
(I’m planning to redo it later on, to make it better-looking for humans. Plus build Kika a house, it’ll be called “le Chat-eau”.)
She’s in deep reflection, regretting her last Tonitrus bolt.
…not really.
As I said in another thread, a week ago: AI is not screwing workers over because it’s stealing jobs. It’s more like suckers at the top will lose big money on AI fluff, and to cut costs off they’ll fire a lot of people.
Based on stuff said in the comments (“İt happened when I asked for weather, maybe someone can replicate it.”), I did some dumb test. Using duck.ai because… well, guess why I’m not subscribed to ChatGPT? Privacy. The article confirms my decision, by the way.
Anyway, I was curious, I wanted to know which location it would assume I’m from.
I don’t know which is the dumbest part - making shit up / lying / assuming, acknowledging its own intellectual dishonesty… or not taking spelling into account. (Using British spelling might not be a sign someone is from the UK [I’m not], but it’s a pretty good sign the person is not in USA.)
For any other game, this would be a sign the player isn’t too serious about winning. Nethack, though?
You quaff the fountain. A bunch of water mocassins pops up.
You go to the mines. Gnome has a wand.
You pick up a grey stone. Loadstone. Cursed. You’re strained, can’t fight for shit. A newt kills you.
Ants claim another victim. Go, Team Ant!
You fall into a trap. It has poisonous spikes.
[insert other 9000 ways the game tries to kill you]
Do you want your possessions identified?
I predicted something similar. Basically: LLMs generating “fluff” speech of unimportant NPCs, so they don’t repeat the same thing over and over. Then the underlying tech (neural networks) replacing scripts to decide opponent actions; the main appeal will be that opponents will adapt to your playstyle, as if you were “training” the model without realising it.
For example, let’s say you’re playing a racing game. Your first runs will be pretty much the same as now. But later runs, the AI “catches” on your strategy, and reacts to it, like:
It would be challenging for game designers, too; they’d need to find the right metrics for the AI. For example if you simply “reward”/“punish” the AI based on wins and losses, the AI will use strategies like ganging up against the player - sure, this is effective, but it is not fun at all.
BTW here’s a cool video of someone “teaching” AI to play Monopoly. I believe the process will be similar-ish, except models would be already a bit pre-“trained” a bit when you buy the game, and further “training” is simply from the player playing it.
I like long games (let’s say, 60h+ to complete) better, as long as the game allows me to stop and resume at any point, without losing progress - I’m OK resuming a playthrough, say, a week later.
15 years from now:
The desktop computer will be still there, same thing as before. Console market share will decrease, but they’ll be still there. Smartphone games will become increasingly more complex, and some games will be made with phone joysticks in mind.
A bunch of new input methods will be released; they’ll be seen as gimmicks, most will fade away. One or two will stick for longer.
There’ll be a bigger crash than in 1983, and a lot of AAA studios will fill bankruptcy. It’ll be like a forest fire - as it burns down the old and big trees, it leaves space for smaller plants to thrive.
You’ll at least one game featuring a multiplayer version of any given current single-player genre. Multiplayer Vampire bullet heaven, multiplayer colony simulator, multiplayer dating sim…
Speaking on bullet heaven (I mean things like Vampire Survivors), you’ll see elements of the genre creeping into other genres. Much like RPGs did in the past.
Nethack version 3.8.4 will be released. It’ll have changes like
LLM presence in games will be subtle. For example, irrelevant NPCs might say things generated by a LLM, instead of pre-scripted ones. This won’t become the standard because they tend to output hallucinations that confuse players (e.g. refer to some item that doesn’t exist), but some games will make good use of it.
“Evolving” enemies on the other hand will be the next big hit. They won’t use any current AI model, but they’ll run local (and way simpler) neural networks. For example, if you kill lots of enemies by luring them into a pit, you might notice newer enemies avoiding to hang around pits.
It was also full of things a few people would love, and most would hate. Eventually replaced by things that are bland, unoffensive, “one size for all”; nobody hates them, but nobody loves them either.
I live in a temperate region, so sub-zero temperatures are already kind of uncommon, even in winter. So it barely snows here - last two times were in 1975 and in 2013. (It does hail sometimes, though. Bloody hail last year killed one of my pepper plants ;_;)
That said I’d probably shape and pack individual blocks. Perhaps even glue them together with some water, if it’s cold enough for that.
TL;DW: execs assume monopoly from market dominance, without taking into account other stores could contest said market dominance.