Skip to content

Grok 4 has been so badly neutered that it's now programmed to see what Elon says about the topic at hand and blindly parrot that line.

Technology
67 55 0
  • Google faces EU antitrust complaint over AI Overviews

    Technology technology
    9
    1
    147 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    55 Aufrufe
    sentient_loom@sh.itjust.worksS
    That's not as clever as you think it is.
  • How to transform your Neovim to Cursor in minutes - Composio

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    4 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 29 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    captainastronaut@seattlelunarsociety.orgC
    If you had asked me during the Obama administration I would have said this a chance of becoming law. Today I give it 0.002%.
  • Las Vegas LED Video Wall Rental

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 61 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    36 Aufrufe
    merde@sh.itjust.worksM
    is the linked article or the title edited? This was a post about VA GPT
  • 462 Stimmen
    94 Beiträge
    310 Aufrufe
    L
    Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information. The law doesn't magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open. If discussion from the public is closed, then it's no longer social media. ban people who share false information Banning people doesn't stop falsehoods. It's a broken solution promoting a false assurance. Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed. Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify. If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want. Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren't claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.
  • Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet

    Technology technology
    19
    146 Stimmen
    19 Beiträge
    66 Aufrufe
    fizz@lemmy.nzF
    This is going to be my goto example of why people need to care about data privacy. This is fucking insane. I'd fire someone for even throwing that out as a suggestion.
  • 32 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    36 Aufrufe
    J
    Apparently, it was required to be allowed in that state: Reading a bit more, during the sentencing phase in that state people making victim impact statements can choose their format for expression, and it's entirely allowed to make statements about what other people would say. So the judge didn't actually have grounds to deny it. No jury during that phase, so it's just the judge listening to free form requests in both directions. It's gross, but the rules very much allow the sister to make a statement about what she believes her brother would have wanted to say, in whatever format she wanted. From: https://sh.itjust.works/comment/18471175 influence the sentence From what I've seen, to be fair, judges' decisions have varied wildly regardless, sadly, and sentences should be more standardized. I wonder what it would've been otherwise.