It's amazing how easily people seem to forget that machines uses tools its creator provides. You can't trust AI to be impartial because it never is as it is a collection of multiple choices made by people.
This is such a bore, having this same conversation over and over. Same thing happened with NFTs and whatever is currently at the height of its tech hype cycle. Don't buy into the hype and realize both AIs potential and shortcomings.
I do agree that technical mistakes are interesting but with AI the answer seems to always be creator bias. Whether it's incomplete training sets or (one-sidedly) moderated results, it doesn't really matter. It pushes the narrative to certain direction, and people trust AIs to be impartial because they presume it's just a machine that interprets reality when it never is.
WhatsApp’s AI shows gun-wielding children when prompted with ‘Palestine’
By contrast, prompts for ‘Israeli’ do not generate images of people wielding guns, even in response to a prompt for ‘Israel army’
So what reality is this model reflecting then?
Why does it matter what the excuse is?
You shouldn't get a stereotype (or in this case I suppose propaganda?) when you give a neutral prompt.
Hey, at least it's a renewable source.
That's honestly an incredibly good solution.
The unfair advantage argument definitely holds water, mouse and keyboard can be like a sports car racing against a bicycle. But if someone had the budget to tackle this issue through software, it would be Microsoft. So I'm inclined to agree that it's mostly just MS squeezing money out of third party manufacturers.
If they'd care only about the "unfair", they'd put a fair, almost free, price on the official license that covers the cost of testing or whatever. Truth presumably here is also a bit more complicated, maybe third party controllers could be easier to hack resulting in an ineffective licensing system, idk. But yeah smells like money for Microsoft and a loss for consumers.
What exactly is Star Citizen? And how does it differ from everything else?
I think it's the same problem Wes Anderson kinda suffers. They're trying to do their thing in the way their audience expects them to.
And I don't really think either is playing a caricature of themselves, there's real creativity at play. But the creative risks are mitigated by relying on their set style, which makes it safe to consume but often not that exciting. I find Dunkey's reviews usually pretty interesting, whether I agree with them or not. But this poetry felt closer to an ad than an honest review.
Never has the word "alleged" felt so meaningless.
Wasn't there a same kind of story out of Japan years ago? Murdered someone during their time Europe?