‘Undisturbed’ is doing a bit of lifting there. The same could be said of a person, generally speaking. Leave most people in a room, they won’t hurt anyone either. It’s just a matter of what circumstances make each dangerous. If you put bullets in a room and set the room on fire, they act as little bombs. If you do that with a person, it makes them less dangerous, because they’re dead. If you put a person in solitary confinement for years on end, they’ll come out mentally disturbed, and possibly violent. Do the same with a bullet, and it comes out presenting the same hazards as when it went in.

Just to have fun by being a bit pedantic, the a bullet is a possible source of toxic lead, and if you are using the colloquialist ‘bullet’ to mean a charged cartidge containing a bullet, the gunpowder charge makes it a tiny bomb, which can be dangerous as well, even without a gun, especially when exposed to idiots with hammers or fire.

Both. Sociality is not in comparison to an idealised ‘pro-social’ (as in seeking to empower or ‘improve’ society) individual. It is in comparison to other animals, like lions, which form social groups almost exclusively based on familial ties, or bears, which usually don’t come together except to mate, or salmon, which technically group up to spawn but are not forming social connections or even pair bonds.

Youtubes content creators are also its victims, just as much as the viewers.

For more information, please subscribe to Dave+ Premium packages availablr at very affordable salaries.

Eh, what version are you quoting? I looked this up because I wanted to see what comes after the elipses, and found Matthew 3-5 to be

⁵ Then Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan went out to him.

Edit: found it. It’s 6-5.

At least that’s prohibitively expensive for a lot of people. It’d be so much worse if it was affordable by more people.

Maybe if you say something which isn’t sarcasm, I’d be more inclined to consider content. Form matters. I can tell you 3857+5298=9155, but if I say it while calling you a slur, you aren’t going to give a fraction of a fuck whether it’s true or not. Why would you expect the rest of the world to listen to you, much less trust you, when you don’t demonstrate even basic good will?

Ugh. I hadn’t even thought of AI slop litigation. These companies are giving a firehose to the mentally ill as a monthly subscription.

Business majors will find a way to make it worse.

Because the tech is basically ready baked at this point and it only needs training to get up to date on recent events, I suspect the cheaper, possibly open models will be used for a lot of BS. You don’t need the latest vajillion dollar model to run customers through a loop of ‘How can I help you today? … Could you please tell me your account number? … Please wait while this input is processed by an open-source LLM on a raspberry pi CPU. … Can I interest you in signing up for our premium service to receive human support? … That’s okay. I’ll ask again later. … Could you please confirm your account details? … I’m sorry. I’m not authorized to solve your problem. Please visit the nearest branch office of our company, located conveniently one mile from the geomagnetic south pole and our one free tier customer service penguin will be happy to hear your complaint. Is there anything else I can help you with today?’

Doctors and lawyers are professionals with niche skills in reasoning and domain knowledge, not replaceable with an LLM. It takes no knowledge to give someone the runaround. If your goal is the pretense of customer service without actual service, you can run shitty models on shitty hardware to make it slow and even more unreliable, and just slap a disclaimer up front saying your company can’t be held responsible for what the LLM spits out. It won’t matter if it sucks when it cuts your payroll expenses and cranks your shareprice so hard that every competitor follows suit to get their bonuses up, or frees up so much cash you just buy out the competition given anti-trust laws are just ignored these days.

Never doubt the ability of a business schooler to make the world a worse place.

Ignorance of the ignorable is bliss. Ignorance of the intrusive adds terror to injury. It’s an amplifier. In other words, if it doesn’t affect you personally, being able to ignore it makes it not part if your reality and unable to cause suffering. If it does affect you personally, you not only experience the problem but the terror of not understanding the problem.

Panel 5: Right: I’m feeling so confident now. I’m going to go bet my life savings that I’m right about horse-drawn NFT printers being the next big thing. Left: You’re so brilliant. You can’t possibly be wrong.

Panel 6:
(caption bar: later…)
Right: I hate you. You told me it couldn’t go wrong. It did. Now I have no money and 600k in debt.
Left: You’re so brilliant. There’s no way it was your fault. Right: Okay, well, my life has been made objectively worse by the lies you told me, but now I want to believe you saying it’s not my fault, so I love you again. By the way, I have a new idea. I think I can farm gold by getting drunk and burying it in a field. Should I borrow money from a mafia loan shark to try to start that business? Left: You’re so brilliant. You can’t possibly be wrong.

My idiotic not-even-briefly-thought-through prediction:

1. LLM systems can’t do anything reliably, but they can do it cheaply, so ‘decision makers’ contract out LLM based systems to handle customer support/service and slap a disclaimer on it. You can pay for premium support by a person. Your PA still has to wait on hold to talk to this person. If you can’t afford a PA, you can’t afford the premium service.
2. It’s so much cheaper than having real people, not because it’s cheap, but because now you have infinitely scalable team size with no downtime, no managers, no benefits, or other ancillary costs. Quality goes down. Unit economics improve.
3. Companies that don’t jump on the LLM train will be more expensive because they have to have real people, which are better on almost every metric, but expensive to maintainne. No one will be able to afford the premium service of having someone who actually has the ability to do anything, so they will lose customer base, so they’ll get more expensive, so they’ll lose customer base, so they… Repeat until they are bought out by their competitors or are a luxury brand charging fifty billionaires whatever they feel like because the check is blank.
4. The market polarizes. Everything is either barely affordable crap or expensive luxury service. No one is happy, but ‘profit’ is maximised. The American health insurance company becomes the model for everything.

They don’t give the average call center worker the ability to fix anything already. The gig mostly became being there for customers to abuse at some point with a bit of passing a handful of people up the chain one step closer to a person with the authorization to maybe offer you appeasement for a problem they won’t actually fix.

There’s a reason LLM chat bots are so common.

Borrow? You planning to give it back?

‘No, don’t turn the vibes off. They’re lulling me into loving your dark magic ways.’

‘That’s not what I meant and you know it.’

Can you define it? I think I’m up to a half dozen broad classes of definitions for this one word at this point.

The cartoon is stupid. It’s a strawman of ‘violence is bad,’ that suggests anyone who says so is a true pacifist, or recognition of violence as a problem is somehow equating a slap on the wrist with a sadistic rape/murder. No one actually believes that. It’s just negative partisanship to let people feel special for being brave enough to say ‘murder is bad.’ It’s morally pretentious BS that insults the intelligence of its readers, regardless of their views on violence.

Why do some people think sarcasm suggests a superior opinion?