But all big tech will need to do is market the concept enough, so that people accept it as what AI always meant
Then they can control what it spits out and control what is "intelligent"; right now what these models spit out is often racist
Who would have known putting in all books into a model would make it racist? I guess anyone who reads, but besides them, who?
I'm not going to entertain the idea that we did not move the goalposts on what AI is.
In addition, the backtracking to AGI is just as stupid because it fails to understand the concept general intelligence too
The conversation begins with everyone agreeing this is marketing hype
There are interesting applications of all types of machine learning-- but pretending we can create artificial intelligence when we can't understand the animal brain is hubris beyond belief
I have a proposal for a solution of the term "AI"; it is neither intelligent by any definition, and often has humans cultivating data sets
And even artist talking about it are forced to talk bout it in the terms as it if is "AI" which benefits them anytime you even engage in discussion
I think a far more accurate and useful description is:
Slop Algorithm
It is a series of machine learning algorithms not AI, and generates slop, not intelligence
de nada
Stop placing complex chronic illness patients on psych holds.
If you don’t know how to treat someone, say so. Don’t tell them it’s all in their head.
Placing patients in the psych ward breaks their trust, sets back their baseline and sends a clear message that they’re not safe in your care.
Medical trauma is real. It maims and kills. Respect our expertise in our bodies. Listen to us and let us be partners in our care.
https://time.com/7206080/long-covid-psychiatric-wards/
#chronicillness #longcovid #mecfs #spoonie #gaslighting #medicalptsd #trauma #disability #ableism
I have broken my windows in a unique way: I'm using a high-DPI display, but my menu size and some other metrics are set wrong.
This happened for reasons. But since Windows 10 removed the Appearances control panel, you can't fix it.
what if I use a ported Windows 8 appearances control panel? THAT'S HOW I BROKE IT IN THE FIRST PLACE
oh hey, some light reading (for $4.48 plus shipping for paperback, or $18 hardcover)
https://sunypress.edu/Books/A/A-History-of-Transgender-Medicine-in-the-United-States
> The company’s aim is to build out a constellation of 300 satellites that can provide real-time updates for any sensor or device outfitted with a Bluetooth low energy (BLE) chip. On its website, Hubble proposes use cases that span industries — from child safety
yeah, life360 spysat network is... bad
actually i took a closer look at their website, particularly their jobs page (figured there'd be more technical details there)
> We differentiate ourselves as the first modem-less and gateway-less, direct-to-satellite network from off-the-shelf BLE chips.
(so, BTLE, not BR/EDR, which is even easier sync-wise AIUI though I know less about that PHY)
and
> Just upload our firmware to your existing chipstack and you're globally connected.
critically, the note there that there's /firmware for the existing BTLE modem/. the rest of their marketing material similarly talks about /off-the-shelf BT chips/ - but if there's custom firmware involved, they could be doing all sorts of wild stuff that a normal BTLE controller won't. so i wonder if they may just have a fully custom protocol (very feasible for e.g. nrf52)
and indeed, let's hop over to the FCC database and search for Hubble:
https://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=343217&x=.
aha! that explains everything! critically, this bit:
> Licensee is authorized to conduct testing for one Hubble terrestrial Endpoint located
at a center point of geographical coordinates 33°27'11" N, 96°46'17" W and a radius
of 24.14 km in Gunter, TX, to transmit to Spire’s Hubble-1, Hubble-2, and Hubble-3
non-geostationary
orbit (“NGSO”) satellites in the 2482.710675-2483.424 MHz frequency band
(Earth-to-space).
that frequency band is *outside the BTLE and BR/EDR range*, and notably it's a tiny frequency range - not even enough for one full 1MHz channel! That's not Bluetooth! (This is probably intention
Furthermore, we can see they're using FSK modulation (probably GFSK) and an emissions designator of 25K0F1D - basically "no more than 25KHz bandwidth, digital modulation". 25KHz bandwidth? That's *definitely* not Bluetooth.
So, what they've done is made a reasonable, slow, low-bandwidth network protocol (maybe LoRA-based), wrote a stack for it that /runs on existing Bluetooth chips/ (probably the NRF52 series, which are highly programmable and highly popular in IOT), and deployed /that/. They're not doing Space Bluetooth, they're being misleading fuckers with their marketing.
We are so deep into the “AI” bubble now that I had almost forgotten what it felt like when everyone was talking about “blockchain preparedness” and some of our most desperate and opportunistic community members were trying to convince everyone that category theory on the blockchain was the real applied category theory… What a time!
Trans woman, bisexual, someone's fiancée, forever a programmer, poly, and former total mess