Legislators are there to directly reflect the opinions and interests of their constituents, judges are there to have expert knowledge of the law and how it applies to each case uniquely. The first needs some form of democratic mechanism to ensure that they represent people’s current opinions, the later needs a meritocratic mechanism to ensure they are experts in the correct fields.

If judges were the only element of a court I would agree that it would be problematic to have no democratic input, but in common law systems at least that element is represented by juries who are the most powerful element of a court case as they are unchallengable arbiters of fact and drawn through sortition which is even more democratic than election.

Judges shouldnt be elected for the same reasons surgeons shouldnt be elected.

Umatrix is great, you can configure it to automatically allow first party javascript, and if sites still dont work eneable bits until they do them lock those settings so the same bits will be enabled next time you’re on that site.

Nope, if you’re working on large arrays of data you can get significant speed ups using well optimised BLAS functions that are vectorised (numpy) which beats out simply written c++ operating on each array element in turn. There’s also Numba which uses LLVM to jit compile a subset of python to get compiled performance, though I didnt go to that in this case.

You could link the BLAS libraries to c++ but its significantly more work than just importing numpy from python.

Python can be extremely slow, it doesn’t have to be. I recently re-wrote a stats program at work and got a ~500x speedup over the original python and a 10x speed up over the c++ rewrite of that. If you know how python works and avoid the performance foot-guns like nested loops you can often (though not always) get good performance.

I absolutely believe this is an absolute requirement in order to dismantle Hamas.

Its very noble of you to stand up for starving millions of people to achieve your desired political outcome, bravo.

Pretty rich from someone who’s entire position is a strawman

Ah yes, totally got me there with the obvious logical link between liberals over egging Trumps link with Russia → no state has ever or will ever try to push narratives on the internet.

That’s nonsense, even if you pretend Taiwan is a part of China, which is clearly nothing more than a useful fiction for all parties, there is a space even at the narrowest point of the straight that is just EEZ. Which is a region that is free to navigate but the host country has exclusive rights to minerals, fishing etc within that region.

A brand new account whose only posts are pushing Russian narratives, hmmm I wonder what this could be?

Humans were the best at weaving until looms came along, humans were the best at welding components together until industrial robots came along. Humans were the best at doing double entry accounting until digital computers came along.

I just don’t see this current wave of AI of being any different than previous technological advances that became tools better at specific tasks than humans.

This is one-way, hunans don’t win back ground.

No they dont they open up new gound as technology increases the range of the possible, as the article talks about

One critical wild card is how many new jobs will be created by AI even as existing ones disappear. Estimating such job creation is notoriously difficult. But MIT’s David Autor and his collaborators recently calculated that 60% of employment in 2018 was in types of jobs that didn’t exist before 1940.

Did you even read the paragraphs I pulled out, not even the article itself?

Then Compton abruptly switched perspectives, acknowledging that for some workers and communities, “technological unemployment may be a very serious social problem, as in a town whose mill has had to shut down, or in a craft which has been superseded by a new art.”

His whole point was technology does not reduce the amount of employment as a whole, but it can focus pain on particular communities that get displaced by technology. I just don’t buy into the tech bro singularity cult that AI will grow at an exponential rate and replace everyone, AI will be a tool like any other - extending human capabilities but not replacing them entirely.

Not the OP, but yes it absolutely should. The idea you can legaly block someones creative expression because they are using elements of culture you have obtained a monopoly of is obscene.

We dont have anything that passes the Turing test. The test isnt just “does it trick people casually talking to it into thinking its a person” its can it decieve a pannel of experts deliberately try to tease out which one of the “people” they are talking to isnt a human.

AFAIK no LLM has passed a rigourious test like that.

People are still trying to pitch nfts to do basic database functions in 2024? I thought we’d moved on from this.

All an NFT can do is trade a url between people, all it does is say “yup this is the url alright, and this person owns this ticket pointing at this url” it adds nothing to authenticating footage.

its €10M or 2% turnover whichever is higher, doubling for more sever infringements. Fining based on turnover is the way to go as it eliminates wriggling out of fines and makes them hurt.

it’s a tool to be used like any other. If you are relying on it to produce working code with no effort on your part then yes it is likely useless. If you are using it to get you most of the way there its very useful. For example, I’m most comfortable writing python but have been doing a lot of c# recently, asking a code focused LLM questions like “how do you rename a column of a c# datatable” is so much quicker and more useful than trying to search through blogspam its not even funny.

Ditto in the UK 50 million people putting crosses on paper with pens in one day. First results come in about 2 hours after the close of the polls at 10pm, 95% done by the time you wake up the next day. Electronic voting has plenty of downsides and no upsides for anyone other than the people making the voting machines.

In Australia a mostly open, sparsely populated, continent sized island with vast amounts of sun wind and hydro, with people mostly gathered in a small band of the coast on one side (and still even then needed 1/3 of total generating capacity backed by fossil fuels).

It’s great that oz can maybe get away with almost entirely renewable (maybe, that simulation is essentially just multiplying current generation by a large number, adding some storage and saying that mostly takes generation above demand, it doesn’t do any sort of analysis of when where or how that energy is generated or makes its way to the sources of demand), but it’s not a model for the rest of the world.

The problem there is the paradox of efficiency, making something more efficient ends up using more of it not less as the increase in use stimulated by the greater efficiency outweighs the reduced input used.