Superschlenz t1_jedlxfn wrote

>At home learning would be much more efficient rather than traditional school.

If you are no longer forcing the poor children with the rich children to be together in the same classroom, the need to watch everything on Netflix would be gone for the poor and the number of pirated copy downloads would decrease.


Superschlenz t1_je7znzd wrote

She had only one video with the topic AI at for the 2005 "Robots" movie, I don't think her signature is authentic. She is still on stage today, but Sarah Connor is not her real name. Maybe another Sarah Connor has signed the letter.


Superschlenz t1_jdbcilg wrote

Maybe video input, which is throttled because it takes too much compute.

Microsoft wants as many private people as possible, and if a feature takes too much compute, less people can use it:

>1. Program Requirements. You need a valid Microsoft account and your devices must meet the minimum system requirements ( The Program is open to users who reside in the markets listed in the FAQ. Individuals can have no more than one Program account, even if an individual has multiple email addresses, and households are limited to six accounts. The Program is solely for your personal and noncommercial use.


Superschlenz t1_j9i3z6t wrote

>privacy may be impossible in the metaverse

Which definition of privacy did they use?

Seems that they didn't mean the connection between some data and a person in real life but instead recognizing someone who uses multiple identities as the same person.


Superschlenz t1_j9hu5t6 wrote

Hippocampus memorizes surprises during the day while cortex recalls and learns them during REM sleep. So that there is room again in hippocampus for tomorrow's surprises.


Superschlenz t1_j9dph84 wrote

The singularity is for people with genetic errors. Intelligence delegated to machines which can fix the errors their creators have built into their bodies.

But is it really a hope rather than vengeance?

Just preventing trashy human bodies from being fertilized in the first place could solve this as well.


Superschlenz t1_j98leen wrote

>It seems unlikely that DeepMind is behind OAI from a science perspective

So it seems unlikely that Alphabet is not just pouring another $10B into DeepMind as Microsoft did with OpenAI?

Hahaha, just kidding. The people at DeepMind are so much more intelligent than the people at OpenAI, they can run all the new models perfectly inside their heads and don't need massive compute to verify and fix their buggy ideas (or hire a load of paid workers for RLHF).


Superschlenz t1_j900f9e wrote

Reply to comment by jaydayl in Microsoft Killed Bing by Neurogence

>not a personal waifu. No sane corporation can allow for such headlines which had been in the news for the recent days

>Unlike productivity-focused assistants such as Cortana, Microsoft’s social chatbots are designed to have longer, more conversational sessions with users.  They have a sense of humor, can chitchat, play games, remember personal details and engage in interesting banter with people, much like you would with a friend.