maretus

maretus t1_j7uuzxv wrote

Reply to This tiny flying robot could work as an artificial pollinator by BorgesBorgesBorges60

I like soap bubbles better than mini drones for pollen dispersement. Seems way more efficient.

And thankfully - There are already experiments successfully using soap bubbles as a way to disperse pollen and it sounds genius to me.

Check it out: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/soap-bubbles-can-pollinate-flowers-can-they-replace-bees-180975145/

4

maretus t1_j7oqrjk wrote

Reply to The Future of AI Detection is Bleak by smswigart

Check out gptzero.me. It seems to work quite a bit better and because of the way it works, that will continue to improve as it’s dataset grows.

We’re already using it at the educational company I work for to detect AI written assignments and essays.

1

maretus t1_j6w6y6u wrote

Reply to comment by L00525324 in The steam engine changed the world. Artificial intelligence could destroy it. - The Boston Globe by GlobeOpinion

Idk man, AI has already replaced several writers at the companies I work for. We only have editors now. And that’s with this rudimentary version of chatgpt.

The way exponential growth works and where we are on that curve means that more AI advances will happen this year than happened in the last 10. That’s what people fail to realize. The speed of innovation and change is increasing rapidly right now. Humans generally aren’t good at adapting to change. Especially change that happens rapidly.

1

maretus t1_j6kzvzm wrote

Reply to comment by MINIMAN10001 in Private UBI by SantoshiEspada

Considering damn near anyone could register a business and fraudulently get PPP money, I’d say some of it did.

My old neighbor used to brag about how she hadn’t worked in months cause she got 30k from the PPP for a “salon” business she set up that never had any actual revenue.

3

maretus t1_j67y7iw wrote

Reply to comment by TheGolgafrinchan in Are most of our predictions wrong? by Sasuke_1738

Ray kurzweil has a theory called ‘the theory of accelerating returns’ which postulates that because of exponential growth, we will see the equivalent of 20,000 years worth of innovation just this century.

Because technology grows exponentially and we’re at the point on the curve where it’s happening so fast that even the rate of change has achieved exponential growth.

1

maretus t1_j5qj5o5 wrote

Reply to comment by landyhill in CNET's AI Journalist Appears to Have Committed Extensive Plagiarism by iingot

I’m a digital marketer and have spent 20+ years writing content and in a lot of cases “rewriting content” to avoid duplicate content filters.

I’d venture a guess than 95%+ or commercial content on the internet is just rehash on rehash on rehash. But is it plagiarism to write the same thing using completely different words?

1

maretus t1_j5nyitw wrote

Reply to CNET's AI Journalist Appears to Have Committed Extensive Plagiarism by iingot

Literally every single example provided on this article is like a 1 or 2 sentence example.

Of course it sounds the same. There are only so many ways to say “this is how you avoid overdraft fees”.

Give me a fuxking break. That isn’t plagiarism. It’s running out of words to say the same thing. If they had used more than 2 sentences in their examples, I’m confident the 2 texts would have diverged more. But come on, of course 1 or 2 sentences about the same topic are going to sound/look the same.

I guarantee this shit passes copyscape which is what 99% of digital marketers use to check for duplicate/plagiarized content.

5