Skip to content

Companies That Tried to Save Money With AI Are Now Spending a Fortune Hiring People to Fix Its Mistakes

Technology
98 72 0
  • Judge backs AI firm over use of copyrighted books

    Technology technology
    59
    1
    174 Stimmen
    59 Beiträge
    198 Aufrufe
    artisian@lemmy.worldA
    The students read Tolkien, then invent their own settings. The judge thinks this is similar to how claude works. I, nor I suspect the judge, meant that the students were reusing world building whole cloth.
  • 241 Stimmen
    77 Beiträge
    271 Aufrufe
    jacksonlamb@lemmy.worldJ
    bizarre, dismal What's bizarre and dismal is that someone is so starved for dopamine and attention from corporations that this is how they perceive what life looks like when you are not being targetted. This is my normal view and it is far better.
  • 45 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    40 Aufrufe
    M
    This will be a privacy nightmare.
  • Have LLMs Finally Mastered Geolocation? - bellingcat

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    50 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    R
    Depends on who programed the AI - and no, it is not Kyoto
  • 75 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    26 Aufrufe
    L
    Police: Arrest you for having an open beer in public Judge: sentences you to prison The PIC:
  • 374 Stimmen
    69 Beiträge
    165 Aufrufe
    T
    In those situations I usually enable 1.5x.
  • AI cheating surge pushes schools into chaos

    Technology technology
    25
    45 Stimmen
    25 Beiträge
    89 Aufrufe
    C
    Sorry for the late reply, I had to sit and think on this one for a little bit. I think there are would be a few things going on when it comes to designing a course to teach critical thinking, nuances, and originality; and they each have their own requirements. For critical thinking: The main goal is to provide students with a toolbelt for solving various problems. Then instilling the habit of always asking "does this match the expected outcome? What was I expecting?". So usually courses will be setup so students learn about a tool, practice using the tool, then have a culminating assignment on using all the tools. Ideally, the problems students face at the end require multiple tools to solve. Nuance mainly naturally comes with exposure to the material from a professional - The way a mechanical engineer may describe building a desk will probably differ greatly compared to a fantasy author. You can also explain definitions and industry standards; but thats really dry. So I try to teach nuances via definitions by mixing in the weird nuances as much as possible with jokes. Then for originality; I've realized I dont actually look for an original idea; but something creative. In a classroom setting, you're usually learning new things about a subject so a student's knowledge of that space is usually very limited. Thus, an idea that they've never heard about may be original to them, but common for an industry expert. For teaching originality creativity, I usually provide time to be creative & think, and provide open ended questions as prompts to explore ideas. My courses that require originality usually have it as a part of the culminating assignment at the end where they can apply their knowledge. I'll also add in time where students can come to me with preliminary ideas and I can provide feedback on whether or not it passes the creative threshold. Not all ideas are original, but I sometimes give a bit of slack if its creative enough. The amount of course overhauling to get around AI really depends on the material being taught. For example, in programming - you teach critical thinking by always testing your code, even with parameters that don't make sense. For example: Try to add 123 + "skibbidy", and see what the program does.
  • 241 Stimmen
    175 Beiträge
    268 Aufrufe
    N
    I think a generic plug would be great but look at how fragmented USB specifications are. Add that to biology and it's a whole other level of difficulty. Brain implants have great potential but the abandonment issue is a problem that exists now that we have to solve for. It's also not really a tech issue but a societal one on affordability and accountability of medical research. Imagine if a company held the patents for the brain device and just closed down without selling or leasing the patent. People with that device would have no support unless a government body forced the release of the patent. This has already happened multiple times to people in clinical trials and scaling up deployment with multiple versions will make the situation worse. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2818077 I don't really have a take on your personal desires. I do think if anyone can afford one they should make sure it's not just the up front cost but also the long term costs to be considered. Like buying an expensive car, it's not if you can afford to purchase it but if you can afford to wreck it.