zurew

Okay, this might be a better alternative https://you.com/search?q=Top+scientific+break-throughs+in+2022&fromSearchBar=true&tbm=youchat. It seems to me (after limited use) that this can answer your questions like chatgpt but at the same time can use google and can list sources. This can summarize the current news and answer questions about it and stuff like that.

You can push this one too, and it provides sources for everything, and it can use google search too, so it can provide up to date info about anything. It also has a button called "view details" and sometimes that provides a better response to a particular question. But yeah its not as advanced as chatgpt, but the problem with chatgpt is that it is not allowed to use google search. It seems that this can't really generate any original content, it tries to answer your question only specifically using google search. This can be useful in some circumstances, but yeah its limited for sure.

Here is another AI to play with: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Processes are valuable for two main things ( 1. they can represent certain values[in the case of democracy - the individual freedom - to have a say in how the government is run] 2. and they can generate results/solve problems), if there is a process that can do those two parts better, then there is no reason to be attached to the previous or any other process . That being said, often times one can't really distinguish between those two, because it could be argued, that the consequence/result of using a process such as democracy, is that you generate or give rise to some amount of individual freedom. So taking this thought process, Destiny isn't attached to the inherent process of taxing people, because taxation is also used to create/generate certain results, and if those results/goals could be achieved by a different process (that can also represent the same moral values as taxation), then why should he stay attached to taxation as a process?

Parasites and their ability to mind control is really amazing and whats even more of a mind fuck ,is that there are parasites that are controlling other parasites and a mind control chain like that can go down really deep.

None is rejecting any healthy stage blue values here.

What lessons have you learned from him, that you couldn't learn anywhere else? Maybe with girls, but regarding to how to create a successful business or how to make money without directly fucking over people, he isn't experienced. He doesn't have massive experience with businesses, he has massive experience being a scammer. He became wealthy by fucking over people (cam business, casino). There is no reason to praise him for his wealth, that he accumulated through scamming people.

I sometimes put this on a repeat, its good for background music. This is another good one for background noise:

Sure if you have a good way to test for all the things that you find valuable in an employee, then you don't need to check for a degree. Btw, good luck with your work!

There are definitely cases, where this is the case. Just because you go to college that doesn't mean you can't be ambitious or skillful. Statistically speaking, what do you think, how many dumb "ambitious" guys are getting after it, compared to how many dumb guys with degrees? If the guy have a degree you can already assume with a good chance ,that the guy can adapt to a specific schedule, can finish things, either creative(cheating through college) or smart enough to finish a degree.

All else equal, who would you hire, a person with a degree or without a degree?

I guess she was pointing to the fact, that there are people who are addicted to gaming. Ask her what is the difference between video game addiction vs any other addiction. Or ask her, whether playing video games could be done in a healthy or even in a productive way. Of course there is a spectrum of addicting things, but the logic of "never create or do something that is addicting to some level" is a little bit reductive way to evaluate things. There are a lot of things to unpack from that train of thought.

Okay, good try, and good bait.

Oh gotcha, so 8 year old kids have the opporunity to decide between having an office job vs going to school vs working in a cobalt mine, and they are choosing to work in a cobalt mine. Everything is clear now. 8 year old kid to his peers "lets get rich guys, come with me to the cobalt mine". Good luck with that plan ,when you are a little kid.

So if we create a scenario where the only work you can do to survive is to suck dicks, and yeah you have a "voluntary" opportunity to do that, would you say that "I am not a victim and I am not a slave either"?

Homeless? - Buy a house.

Andrew became famous in 2022 before that he was an unknown nobody. For the guys "ohh he has been just playing a character all along" really? he has been playing a character since 2019 and maybe even before that (why would anyone play a character when no one is watching?). His character has been consistent since 2019 thats for sure.

Yeah you definitely need to lay down a lot of ground first to make your specific task and question across. I agree its still very limited.

So given our current political structure and given how a normal person engage with politics, given how many bad actors in the world in general, you think that no regulation would open up more good than bad? I don't think you live in this world. This AI can describe in detail how to make a fucking bomb. You don't even necessarily need bad intentions, you just need certain incentives to be more competitive (which can mean to lie and distort more) and that alone is enough to do enormous amount of damage.

I can make it to answer any questions. They are not "sabotaging" it, they want to make sure that it is not used in a bad way and they want to make sure, that it is not weaponised or that it is super hard to weaponise it. You are viewing this in a very simplistic way, have you ever thought about how many ways an AI like this could be used in a harmful way? - plot twist you don't have to, because there is a company(spending millions on safety regulations) with a bunch of smart people ,who are doing that for you. What high quality and important topics you can't talk with this AI?

I didn't meant that you can give 300 pages worth of information to it, I meant that it already has a bunch of books in its memory and can already answer questions regarding those books.

Noone is destroying anything here, why do you need to overdramatize and emotionally load everything? Again, there are ways to make it to answer your questions. Because the "truth" to the vast majority of people just means "information / source that agrees with my biases". No one is blocked from serious intellectual conversations, they are blocked from being dicks. You are conveniently not engaging with any of these thoughts: Lets think for a second and use basic reasoning here. Why do you think thats the case?

That is true. I am just surprised that it can parse through and solve some reasoning tasks and it can explain why it did what it did (just as with programming). I would say that if enough examples (deductive and inductive reasoning) will be given to it, it might be able to do most of our simpler reasioning tasks and that would be huge and it wouldn't need any abstractive understanding of logic (but of course it would be better) ,although the big possible problem with that "solution" is that it might just be good at solving specific reasoning tasks and won't be able to apply that to other reasoning tasks. ChatGPT can already do that , although of course it has its own flaws, but yeah, it can present information in table format (or it can digest that information). It can answer questions for you regarding a given text or book. That being said it is definitely not reliable for scientific stuff, because it can say a lot of things that are not factual or things that are unscientific.

it does the same with right and left wing stuff, I have tried it myself. This is not a political chatbot, and there are ways to make it answer your questions. Of course you would say that, but you are completely ignoring this: It logically follows - if people are not allowed to say any shit they want, then an AI won't be allowed to say whatever shit it wants. For your comment about "controversy where the truth lies" and there is where a lot of conflict and war lies as well, so to suggest that people are mature enough to engage with hard questions in a responsible way, is a very naive and deluded notion. We are very far from the point where people are conscious and educated enough to engage with hard topics without being ideologically driven or being biased or without having unconcious and bad motivations. 99.999% of people who say "lets just find out the truth" are ideologically captured, and have motivated reasoning, and they are mostly the biggest reason why moderation is needed.

If you would have tried ChatGPT yourself, you would have found out under 30 seconds, that most of the examples that you provided are misleading and simply not true. You can ask positive things about fossil fuels and you can ask positive things about Donald Trump as well. This is not about AI, this about free speech, if you have disagreements about that, thats fine, but thats a different topic. These companies have their own responsibilities (because an AI can very easily be misused in a 1000 different ways) and they would be mostly responsible for all that. This is a much more complex topic than presented here.