• 1 Post
  • 51 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 10th, 2023

help-circle







  • I suppose if you’re not trying to let people know that their views are not acceptable then you’re part of the problem.

    Yes, but how are you approaching this discussion?

    I think there are different ways to handle this. On one hand you can be hostile and “give them what they deserve”. On the other hand you can engage in friendly arguments.

    This is a story about how someone from the Westboro Baptist Church left because of the way that people engaged with her. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVV2Zk88beY

    What’s worth noting from this story, people that were hostile in their interactions with her only served to entrench her further in her ideals.

    What caused her to change her mind were the people that had “friendly arguments” and made an effort to learn where she was coming from.

    She listed out 4 key points when engaging in difficult conversations. I extracted/paraphrased some of what she said below:

    1. Don’t assume bad intent (assume good or neutral intent instead) - Assuming ill motive almost instantly cuts you off from truly understanding why someone does and believes as they do. We forget that they’re a human being with a lifetime of experience that shaped their mind and we get stuck on that first wave of anger and the conversation has a very hard time ever moving beyond it.

    2. Ask Questions - Asking questions helps us map the disconnect. We can’t present effective arguments if we don’t understand where the other side is coming from.

    3. Stay calm - She though that “[her] rightness justified [her] rudeness”. When things get too hostile during a conversation, tell a joke, recommend a book, change the subject, or excuse yourself from the conversation. The discussion isn’t over, but pause it for a time to let tensions dissapate.

    4. Make the argument - One side effect of having strong beliefs is that we sometimes assume that the value of our position is, or should be, obvious and self-evident. That we shouldn’t have to defend our positions because they’re so clearly right and good. If it were that simple, we would all see things the same way.

    You can’t expect others to spontaneously change their minds. If we want change, we have to make the case for it.



  • Most of those videos are also found on YouTube. I would expect that you don’t see those videos suggested to you because the algorithm has learned what you like to watch.

    If you open up YouTube with a VPN and in a private tab you’ll likely get search results that include a mix from both the right and the left.

    I’d rather not link to them, but from the ones you circled, these are the videos that I found on YouTube while doing a quick search:

    • The Babylon Bee video
    • The Paris Olympics opening ceremony video
    • The Assassins Creed video

    Now please excuse me as I purge my history…


  • Vomitting immediately after pushing your body to its limit is fairly normal.

    Someone correct me if I’m wrong, I believe the reason is because your body redirects blood/energy to the most important parts when your body is under strain.

    Edit: Please see the correction provided by EpicFailGuy below.

    So, if there’s too much food in your stomache and you’re pushing your body to its absolute limit, the stomache becomes less important as to whether it needs to continue working well. Blood is directed away from the stomache and you will vomit.

    This is, at least, what happens when someone goes through shock, I’m assuming something similar is at play when pushing your body to its limit.

    If swimmers end up sick or contracting some diseases, that’s when we should worry. But we won’t see those effects as immediately as the end of a race.







  • I’d say the proof is on Apple to show that it’s being done on-device or that all processing is done on iCloud servers.

    You’re saying that OpenAI is just going to hand over their full ChatGPT model for Apple to set up on their own servers for free?

    But from the article itself:

    the partnership could burn extra money for OpenAI, because it pays Microsoft to host ChatGPT’s capabilities on its Azure cloud

    I get it if they created a small version of their LLM to run locally, but I would expect Apple to pay a price even for that.

    I think you may be confusing this ChatGPT integration with Apple’s own LLM that they’re working on… Again, from the linked article:

    Still, Apple’s choice of ChatGPT as Apple’s first external AI integration has led to widespread misunderstanding, especially since Apple buried the lede about its own in-house LLM technology that powers its new “Apple Intelligence” platform.


  • What? No. I would rather use my own local LLM where the data never leaves my device. And if I had to submit anything to ChatGPT I would want it anonymized as much as possible.

    Is Apple doing the right thing? Hard to say, any answer here will just be an opinion. There are pros and cons to this decision and that’s up to the end user to decide if the benefits of using ChatGPT are worth the cost of their data. I can see some useful use cases for this tech, and I don’t blame Apple for wanting to strike while the iron is hot.

    There’s not much you can really do to strip out identifying data from prompts/requests made to ChatGPT. Any anonymization of that part of the data is on OpenAI to handle.
    Apple can obfuscate which user is asking for what as well as specific location data, but if I’m using the LLM and I tell it to write up a report while including my full name in my prompt/request… that’s all going directly into OpenAIs servers and logs which they can eventually use to help refine/retrain their model at some point.