I went to four different cities in China and at least a significant proportion of people seemed very selfish and out for themselves across the board, I’m not going to say never but it’s definitely at the bottom of my list of places to return to.

I don’t think it’s ok.

I think it’s not the state’s job to dictate whether people can do it. I have the exact same opinion for cheating.

Yeah nah.

People (normal people) like having their messages, facebook comments, whatever else coming up somewhere even more accessible than their phone in their pocket.

It depends how you define “racial hate” and how you define mental or social harm. I also do mean social harm, not societal, meaning to catch things like sunset communities (ie restricting where people can live, or where they can go), rather than “society is worse off because of people’s opinions.”

Again, in my opinion, it depends on intent. If you make a post on your blog with 200 followers saying “I’m tired of X race moving to my city,” I don’t think that should be illegal, even if it is disgusting behaviour. If you post it to (eg) a community group for those people, I’d say it should be illegal.

That said, I’m very liberal on policing, so believe that the state shouldn’t be responsible for policing morality, which people may not like when they realise it involves making things that are pretty much objectively immoral legal, regardless of what they are.

I would say intent matters and while it’s impossible to truly determine it, we still have a distinction for murder/manslaughter and negligence.

If a politician lies or hides something for personal gain, that should be illegal, but there’s so much stuff the state does where it’s best if the general public don’t know, public order would probably break down pretty quickly otherwise.

Same with racial hate. If it’s just stating an opinion, fine, I probably don’t agree but go ahead. If you’re actively trying to harm (mentally, economically, socially or physically) that group, or inciting others to do the same, then that’s not fine.

Everyone has a different definition, but yeah generally free speech in an ideal sense extends to just before you start causing what a reasonable person would concern harm to someone.

It doesn’t say anything about LLMs, they just do lyrics, and they’re definitively shit, and you can tell right away.

Image generation models actually aren’t terrible at generating melodies, so for genres like Jazz and EDM they make surprisingly acceptable music.

deleted by creator

Eh, there’s a lot of blending of conjecture, opinion and fact all presented as truth, and their handling of mistakes could be better - they’ve openly said if they consider a mistake to be minor then they don’t even issue a correction or update.

I personally think that attitude towards production pushes it towards slop, as for things like entertainment one of the key defining things that separate slop from quality media is passion, but if you don’t care about making accurate content then are you any better than just getting AI to write a script?

Same even in the UK, and I think the UK and Germany are are the most likely in Europe to do random things like the US, so it sounds like it’s just their thing

Germanic speakers moment

That’s why you ask 6 of them, and of they all come to the same conclusion then chances are it’s either right, or a common pitfall.

떡볶이us (or 떡볶이ius I guess?)

no complaints actually it sounds kind of cool

Nah, as a European this is pretty un-American

Their propaganda is usually much more subtle

The Leif Erikson one is very subjective though; you could celebrate:

• The first humans to cross the Bering Strait, which is a long extinct lineage
• The earliest ancestors to settle the Americas, whom we don’t even know the descendants of
• The first Europeans to reach the Americas, ie Leif Erikson (Polynesia did it much later)
• The first people to cross an ocean to get to the Americas, most likely Polynesians but possibly Columbus
• The first Europeans to form a permanent settlement in the Americas, ie Columbus
• The founders of the forerunner to the US, ie Walter Raleigh & co
• The founding fathers for founding the US

And plenty more I’m sure you could come up with

I don’t know about “art”, one part of ai image generation is of replacing stock images and erotic photos which frankly I don’t have a huge issue with as they’re both at least semi-exploitative industries anyway in many ways and you just need something that’s good enough.

Obviously these don’t extend to things a reasonable person would consider art, but business majors and tech bros rebranding something shitty to position it as a competitor to or in the same class as something it so obviously isn’t.

You’re bringing up edge cases for #1, and it should be replacing google translate and basic human translation, eg allowing people to understand posts online or communicate textually with people with whom they don’t share a common language. Using it for anything high stakes or legal documents is asking for trouble though.

For 2, it’s not for AIs finding issues, it’s for people wanting to book a flight, or seek compensation for a delayed flight, or find out what meals will be served on their flight. Some people prefer to use text or voice communication over a UI, and this makes it easier to provide.

For 3, grammar and spelling are different. I said it wasn’t useful for spellcheck, but even then if you give it the right context it may or may not catch it. I was referring more to word order and punctuation positioning.

For 4, yeah for me it’s on par in terms of results, but much much faster, especially when asking followup questions or specifying constraints. A lot of people aren’t search engine powerusers though, so will find it significantly easier, faster and better than conventional search than having to manage tabs or keep track of what you’ve seen without just scrolling back up in the conversation.

For 5, recipes have been in the gutter for a decade or more now, SEO came before LLMs, but yeah, you’ve actually caught on to an obvious #6 I missed here of text summarisation…

What I’m getting overall though is that you’re not considering how tech-savvy the average person is, which absolutely makes them seem less useful as the more tech savvy you are, both the more you’re aware of their weaknesses and the less you benefit from the speedup by simplification they bring. This does make ai’s shortcomings more dangerous, but as it matures one would hope that it becomes common knowledge.

Who said you were scary?

Frankly I pity you more than anything.

And no matter what I picked, you’d reject them because you’re not actually considering them, you’re just either a troll, a contrarian or a luddite.

Nice, here’s a gold star for finding one case of it doing something wrong. I’ll call the CEO of AI and tell them to call it off, it’s a good thing humans have never said anything like that!