A reply to the original post, from a lemmy.ml account. I blocked them, so I can’t link you to it.

How about the comment further up - “daily dot world self-soothing thread” ?

Do commercial/industrial buildings not require power then?

You aren’t wrong, but you are assuming that the grid is required. Solar panels can be installed at the point of use, and then the grid doesn’t come into it at all.

But you say they are coming up with excuses for her. There are no excuses provided there.

If AIs are to find the solution for us, we need one really smart one, not many AIs that are similarly smart to existing ones. He is proposing building more data centres, ie. the latter option.

If we can spot these trends while working 9-5, then an idiot can probably spot them if they spend 40 hours a week on it.

That is the error that the model made. Your quote talks about the causes of these errors. I asked what caused the model to make this error.

Sure, but which of these factors do you think were relevant to the case in the article? The AI seems to have had a large corpus of documents relating to the reporter. Those articles presumably stated clearly that he was the reporter and not the defendant. We are left with “incorrect assumptions made by the model”. What kind of assumption would that be?

In fact, all of the results are hallucinations. It’s just that some of them happen to be good answers and others are not. Instead of labelling the bad answers as hallucinations, we should be labelling the good ones as confirmation bias.

The attraction of Linux is precisely that it isn’t one of the two ‘standards’. Your working environment doesn’t get determined by some product manager in a far-away office, who has a set of target users in mind, which he’s given fictional names, biographies and mugshots.

The email says that you can do it. It doesn’t say that you can do it without purchasing the upsell option.

The top of this comment thread is a person claiming that men do all the hunting in every primitive society, not just hunting based on long distance running.

You came into the thread to criticise a paper that showed that women hunt in 50 different societies around the world. Even your estimate of 50% is plenty enough examples to debunk the “all the hunting” claim.

Women are perfectly capable of drawing a bow that is suitable to hunt monkeys, rabbits, squirrels, small birds, etc. Accuracy is more important than power.

If your strategy for hunting mammoths involves your physical strength, you’re gonna have a bad time.

You would need to be in luck. Let’s assume that they studied all 200 uncontacted tribes. To bring the overall rate to 50%, you would need 119 out of the 200 to be exclusively males hunting - 60% of those societies. The researchers studied 63 societies and found that 20% of them were exclusively males hunting.

But what’s the point anyway? The hypothesis is that males evolved to be bigger for hunting, even 50% of societies where women hunt is enough to make it implausible. In those societies, women are hunting in spite of their apparent size disadvantage.

I think you should ask yourself whether size is actually important for hunting. We don’t wrestle our prey. Size doesn’t matter if you’re bringing down monkeys from the trees with a bow and arrow, and size doesn’t matter if you’re trying to bring down a mammoth.

I suspect not. To get to 50%, they would need to study an additional 37 societies, and every single one would have to have only males doing the hunting.

You explicitly mentioned the Sentinelese. Exactly how would you go about this infrequent contact and observation with them?

In any case, let’s assume that hunting is exclusively performed by males in all of those peoples. How much would that change the statistic and the overall conclusion? 79% would be 72%

You think they should have surveyed the uncontacted people?

Formula 1 switched to semi-automatic in the 1980s. The technology has only improved over the last 40 years. If fast is what you want, driving a manual is insanity.

I don’t think the billionaires’ investments are going to be worth billions if the global economy collapses.

We need to be transitioning to zero carbon as fast as possible, period, and even that isn’t good enough. Moderating our energy consumption is vital. There is a cliff at the end of the road and business as usual means driving on down the road.

I am not saying that we need to turn off our lights and heating. I am saying that we first-worlders use a lot of power on frivolous things that we absolutely can live without.

Your ICE has a significantly longer range, and the road network has evolved so that you can be reasonably confident that you’ll find a filling station when you need one.

Today I’m driving an EV that doesn’t have it, and I’m missing it. Different EVs have different ranges and not every filling station on the autobahn has chargers. On the other hand, there are lots of places just off the autobahn which do have chargers. It’s a different game. Your mileage may vary of course.