Seems likely given the recent talk of removing Trump via the 25th(?) ammendment. Less likely if there’s no VP (let’s hope noone in the administration watched The West Wing!)

Because 1) it’s true and the article is a bit misleading as to whom is actually doing the lying and 2) it’s important to remember that LLM are not sentient and to push back against the tide of language which subtly suggests they are.

The point is, the LLM is not ‘lying’ to you. It’s showing you information. It doesn’t ‘know’ whether the information is true or not. It also doesn’t ‘care’. Because it is a statistical model and is incapable of those things. And if you scroll back to my initial point, I said “technically, it’s not lying, because lying requires intent to deceive, and LLMs don’t have intent”

No, you are proving my point here. You say ‘they’ as in the publishers/owners/printers of the newspaper. You don’t blame ‘it’ the literal, physical piece of paper you are holding in your hands.

In the same way that you would not say a clock was lying to you if it displays the wrong time.

If a newspaper prints lies you don’t say the physical piece of pulped up tree you are holding is lying to you, you say the author is.

An LLM is a statistical modeling tool. It doesn’t have goals. It can’t have intentions. It just outputs according to an algorithm.

Oooh, philosophy! I disagree. I think that if a person programs a LLM to give disinformation, that’s all it is. A lie giving misinformation knowing that’s it’s disinformation, intending do deceive. The LLM doesn’t know what’s true or false. It doesn’t intend anything, because it is not a conscious entity. The person who programmed it can be lying by disseminating false information, the LLM cannot, any more than a broken clock or thermometer is ‘lying’ about the time or temperature.

Not technically lies, as to lie there has to be an intent to deceive. LLMs don’t have any intentions.

Right. But have you ever actually interact with a) children or b) addicts?. Both groups well known for being totally reasonable and receptive to logical arguments! Trying to persuade them that the thing they love is actually causing them harm is nigh on impossible. ‘I’m not concerned about her welfare, I’m just being mean’. ‘other kids may get addicted, but I’m fine, totally in control’. ‘if it was bad there would be laws’ Etc etc.

I’m not Australian, but I can at least referenced the attempt, and the court case in LA when telling the kid to put the tablet down. I’m not saying the law is the end of the matter, but just saying educate your kids is also far from the end, and is the line the social media companies emphasis because it moves the blame from them to parents

Dunno, I’m not the one paid to come up with solutions. But, at the very least efforts like this teach kids that there is a problem. Like, yeah, we can easily circumvent the measures, but the gov still thinks it necessary to implement them.

But the idea that we just need education is ridiculous. It’s the exact defence that the social media platforms espous, because they know it’s bullshit and ineffective.

That’s a bit like saying ‘there is a problem with smack/nicotine/alcohol addiction, but the solution is not restriction, it’s education’. You can educate all you want, but very clever people make a lot of money by saying ‘fuck your education’.

Further to this, there isn’t a ‘launch the nuclear weapons’ application which controls things. Windows is used for the day to day admin - producing the paperwork required in any organisation - but the actual control systems, for the submarine, the weapons the reactor etc are not running off windows.

General strike.

Yep

Lol, fancy trying to make roads safer 😂

Because goverment debt isn’t like household debt. They don’t go to the Bank of China or the Bank af America and apply for a few billion! The fed issues securities - fixed yield, fixed term bonds. Anybody is free to buy these securities and hence, the biggest holder of US gov debt is the US people, through investment funds, pensions and personal holdings. The fed promises to pay the holder the value of the security after the fixed term expires, as well as small dividend payments for the duration of the term. As the fed prints the money used to pay the bond, they are seen as a safe investment, a hedge against more volotile financial instruments.

As the other reply stated, gov debt isn’t necessarily detrimental, it’s an important tool for regulating the economy. If a government ‘borrows’ 5 billion but grows the economy by 7 billion, that’s sound economics.

OP asked ‘has this ever happened to you?’ . I replied with my experience. Third poster replied with random non relevant experience of something not happening. I reply ‘so what?’. You feel the need to validate third poster…profit???

This is the question!

Yeah? So what?