Skip to content

OpenAI supremo Sam Altman says he 'doesn't know how' he would have taken care of his baby without the help of ChatGPT

Technology
57 48 0
  • 16 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    R
    Even with pirated Spotify the worsening of recommendations pushed me to pirate another service. Which is a win for Spotify, I guess.
  • Is Matrix cooked?

    Technology technology
    53
    100 Stimmen
    53 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    H
    I visited the founder's Bluesky account. It's terrible. The guy is extremely confused
  • Matrix.org is Introducing Premium Accounts

    Technology technology
    110
    1
    226 Stimmen
    110 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    F
    It's nice that this exists, but even for this I'd prefer to use an open source tool. And it of course helps with migration only if the old HS is still online.. I think most practically this migration function would be built inside some Matrix client (one that would support more than one server to start with), but I suppose a standalone tool would be a decent solution as well.
  • Open Source CAD In The Browser

    Technology technology
    19
    1
    152 Stimmen
    19 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    xavier666@lemm.eeX
    Electron: Heyyyyyyy
  • 811 Stimmen
    150 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    C
    The top hits for my "WSB" search are: World Sports Betting r/WallStreetBets World Superbikes I don't think any of their goons are astroturfing (well, maybe World Superbikes). Did you mean a different entity?
  • I am disappointed in the AI discourse

    Technology technology
    27
    7 Stimmen
    27 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    artocode404@lemmy.dbzer0.comA
    I apologize that apparently Lemmy/Reddit people do not have enough self-awareness to accept good criticism, especially if it was just automatically generated and have downloaded that to oblivion. Though I don't really think you should respond to comments with a chatGPT link, not exactly helpful. Comes off a tad bit AI Bro...
  • 463 Stimmen
    94 Beiträge
    3 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.
  • 27 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    C
    I really wish their whole lap-dock concept had succeeded. Or at least ran a few more generations, so I could get an upgraded model with USBc