you can downvote on lemmy?

Yes I, uh… rolls dice saw you once in… rolls dice College, and I remember… rolls dice playing Uno… rolls dice under a Sycamore Tree.

…OP, it’s a weird question. Why ask this in some sub-lemmy of all places? Any reason at all?

using von der leyen as the standin for europe is a kick in the teeth. Two disgusting human being facing off.

“quickly”, yes. “Accurately” is a huge misdescription.

The real reason is right after in your quote: It’s funded by bezos. He wants to have that grant money for himself to fund his datacenters, and have another item on a list of funding reasons by investors.

Wait, let’s take a step back. There is no need to regulate immigration. If anything, I think immigration should be made a non-issue, and citizenship extended to anyone who’s within a country for more than a few months, refugees (economic, political, humanitarian) should receive special protective status, fortress Europa should be disbanded, and diplomatic ties to turkey should be rescinded (as it commits crimes against humanity to oppress and categorically suppress migration).

So, yeah, the alternative is pretty easy to do, it just means the EU has to actually rescind its fascist history, instead of doing a liberal half-assed move that just makes it easy for fascists to resurge again.

“Europe must combat far-right at the source” … “We, as Europe, must limit non-skilled migration of all”

Do you listen to yourself? If yes, tell me a time and place and I can show you what your first statement means in relation to your second statement 🙃

generative AI, which is definitionally explicit in terms of how the technology works, and can therefore be banned. Analytical AI (like, mammography scan pattern recognition, which is the only “AI” of value) is technologically disjointed, not created by the typical genAI companies, and can therefore be excluded from the ban.

Why can’t you outlaw it? Define generative/inference AI systems, ban companies from interacting with EU people and companies, and then heavily punish anything being revealed to be commercially sold, made or used with that AI within the EU.

yeah exactly! AI should have never been allowed to exist and/or allowed to be used in the EU, and anything created with it should be heavily punished.

Shooting yourself in the foot so others can’t shoot you in the foot? No.

How about outlawing and banning the shooting of feet instead? That might work better.

No disrespect to you, but it is clear you don’t understand the technology well.

Algorithms are, per definition, routine computations to perform a task. Even clicking on a link and then the browser requesting and displaying the page associated with it is an algorithm!

And about (generative) AI: -They cannot be made energy efficient because generation (giving you a text or image) is incredibly energy consuming -You cannot build an AI without bias or discrimination, because all your training material has to be unbiased and without discrimination - and social progress means that we will continue to recognize previously unknown harms in society. AI can only be as unbiased as its most biased training material. And the amount of data you need for training is too high to be efficient to gather before training. -AI cannot be made to be accurate. It is definitionally impossible, because it is basically an extension of auto-correct - it can only predict the next likely word from a huge collection of data. Accuracy is never a part of the algorithm of AI. -In terms of public service, it would be better to point out above chatbots that they can only generate legibile text, all other aspects are secondary.

So, in summary, what you suggest is technologically impossible, or at least misguided.

EU investing in AI is not a win, good, or anything desirable.

AI is the worst “technology” to surface in a “post-fact” news, which helps proliferate fake news, misinformation, biased and propagandized talking points (i.e. pro-israel, anti-hong-kong-sovereignty, racism and transphobia…), kills jobs and undervalues labour in a cost of living and housing crisis.

This investment is a signal saying that the EU will not be a union for its people, but for its elite and businesses. It’s an abdication of morals by EU politicians and governments.

Do people not realise that von der Leyen is a right-wing fan of totalitarianism? What she supports cannot be good for us.

Oh, sorry! I thought this was like “Mike Tyson, the boxer,…” - an embedded sentence expaining something in more detail! The actual meaning you meant to convey is much more fitting :)

“us, the trainers” is a bit of a misnomer, if the training is done mostly by silicon valley cultists like Sam Altman and his ilk, who have shown that they do not understand reality.

the propaganda bots are out in a rage today. Go puke words somewhere else why don’t you?

liking LLMs? That’s whack.

I think you’re right that they don’t need to be shipped through the US, but they most probably are and will be, and using other suppliers or logistics firms that don’t isn’t always cheaper, especially with large volume shipments. Otherwise, even if there are consoles in storage, the increase has to be targeted at a whole market to also partially stave off the tariff costs and to unify a market on its conditions.

Also, Sony were the first to raise the prices for games beyond 60€.

I the US it’s mostly due to the fascist tariffs, no? Latin America has a similar issue, tho that’s because of the tax system in for example Brazil. Considering the financial situation in Argentina, hyperinflation may make price increases necessary.

Sony, on the other hand, is known to raise prices, and may have been the pioneer of raising prices for their games and consoles. That’s why I didn’t care for them.

got any source for that on the nintendo side? Idc about sony.

Using mono ulture as a word doesn’t change the meaning here. If anything, its a pathway for the foal you ascribe.

I do give you credit about the second part - it would be better to have your own private key in chat apps, which isn’t handled by the app itself, at the very least to establish a shared key. I still think the existence of crypto is a massive boon to many, even in a “flawed” implementation with the “control” being on the side of corporations - tho if they are smart, they’d never store the keys themselves, not even hashes. Unless you’re part of the signal project, I doubt you know the exact implementation and storage of data they do.

Still, thanks for summarising your lengthy post, even if I had to bait you into it. Sometimes, brevity is key.