I think you may have read the parent's statistics backwards. Their point (correct or incorrect) was that younger academics are more accepting of the suppression of speech.

Realistically, whoever manages you will take credit for the additional productivity and leverage it to get more money for themselves.

I work as a land surveyor. I'm outdoors every day, often in the woods. The pay is decent and the work is rewarding.

Would one need to invest in certifications or college degrees for such a job?

This is exactly how language works; words are adopted across domains and change meaning over time.

If there's any forum which can influence a more correct name for a concept it's this one, so please excuse me while I try to point out that contemporary LLMs confabulate and hallucinating should be reserved for more capable models.

A female deer is called a doe.

> doe

A deer? A female deer?

> Me

A name I call myself?

> Fa

A long long way to run?

> Sew

A needle pulling thread?

> La A note to follow sol

Yes, if only there was some kind of democratic process in this country, where citizens could influence the laws that are passed...

Is this some kind of sarcastic joke? Anti-China legislation is popular with both parties. So who do you vote for in a two-party system?

You vote for the side that's most favorable to reform and then vote for the people within that party most likely to bend things toward your goals, ideally slowly shifting one side's stance toward yours until there is a difference between the parties. You and everyone you can convince go do that work, and it is work, for 5-10 cycles and you might effect meaningful change.

There was never a "one election will fix everything" in the US and people who pretend that's the only path and use that to discount the possibility of change were never serious about change to begin with. Had they been serious, they'd have studied history enough to see you rarely get what you want with one election cycle.

It's the quitters that got us into this uniparty situation on so many issues. Don't be a quitter, get active and stay active until you see the change you want.

Interesting, almost all drive-throughs here have an awning.

I find it quite nice. Everyone has their own tastes I suppose.

My only complaint with self-hosting matrix is that the canonical python implementation is quite resource-heavy. I was unable to run it on a cheap VPS. I hope that the ecosystem will improve in the future.

I agree. I really prefer Dendrite, their Go server, but development has slowed down lately. Also, because of the financial issues they have been having, I don't have a lot of hope that Dendrite will get a lot of attention. Maybe Conduit(https://conduit.rs) will become more viable instead of Dendrite. We really need a small efficient build with no moving parts, for the self hosters community.

When did you test it? It has improved very much in the past five years.

And similarly, some people are always hungry for an opportunity to villanize OpenAI. This kind of polarized, black-and-white thinking is not productive.

Neither is false balance or enlightened centrism. The point of the GP is that we shouldn't worshipping these companies. They're not your Lord.

Yes, and the point of the "enlightened centrist" is that bad actions by a company don't mean that any complaints thrown at them are automatically valid, or that every employee at the company is acting maliciously. Pledging your allegiance to a megacorp is bad, but thinking that the court of public opinion is always correct is just as foolish.

We're not talking about any complaint, we're talking about a specific complaint. In the other thread there are about a dozen OpenAI fanboys saying the OpenAI copycat is different from the Ford copycat for a reason which is refuted by the Tom Waits case; the Tom Waits impersonator wasn't singing a Tom Waits song, they were singing about chips.

I'm not. Your comment said that, for a certain group of superfans, OpenAI can do no wrong and will always be biased in their favour. nsvd added that other people want to see OpenAI fail and will view anything regarding them negatively. I'm just elaborating on that. For one reason or another, this discourse has become personal for many people - the specific complaints don't matter, many people will be coming in with preconceived notions no matter what.

The claim is that Sam fanboys would defend Sam in any circumstance, not that Sam is guilty in any circumstance. The distinction shouldn't require explaination. If you're confused, then ask the chatbot to explain it to you.

OpenAI hasn't made it hard. Releasing ChatGPT has made a lot of peoples' lives worse, and their bait and switch from non-profit to profit are just the tip of the iceberg.

Teachers, for starters.

Ok I can see that teachers cant tell if a student has written an essay or used ChatGPT but how is that materially different from students paying for other people to write their essays? Its cheaper and easier? I knew students who payed for essays well before ChatGPT existed.

Any other examples? Not trying to defend OpenAI just interested in this idea that it has actually made anyones lives worse.