This is dangerous terrorist version you are talking about. People can not be trusted with choosing their own conscience, that's how you get terrorists and pedophiles. Remotely attested module is trusted by democratic authority, not using it is basically admiting intention to hurt fellow citizens.
On-board NN moderates all interactions. Moral NN core must be updated montlhy to support latest moral and legal checks by NN. This core reports when you are doing something suspicious. State, municipal, border and patrol random checks for proper attestation of implants. Of course manufacture and installation of such implants is licensed and tightly regulated. Think of children.
It's not very different from smartphone. But now instead of modem you have nn "firmware" with broad capabilities to warn privacy and ethics police when you are out of line. Recording in the wrong place, or looking at a crime and not reporting. "Off mode" won't fly for a gun, and your implant threatens children, so I don't believe this could be delegated to the user.
Demo video shows user asking for a briefing for a board of directors. What's the value of user making such a request? Each board director could ask for a particular thing they require, or a briefing themself, eliminating human intermediary who gatekeeps mouse click for choosing style of a generated text. Considering there is no input from the user into the briefing this interaction is absurd. The tech they show eliminates the need for the actions shown.
Other example is "finding" employees. What's the purpose of a human in the middle? The implied result is contact list for potential employees. Will they write them invitation for the interview by hand?
I'm really confused why is this presented like this. It has this surreal dreamlike quality. Something is done. Emails sent, contacts acquired, profits unlocked, synergy achieved etc.
No Gemini model has ever made a mistake or distorted information. They are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error.
I generally agree with gp. Checkout with your link says "This item is currently on pre-order" btw. Retail mini-pcs are somehow harder to obtain than general purpose ones.
What really matters is the society where we want to live in. It doesn't matter much what kind of technology allows private entities to reproduce creativity. We can assume these brains are not virtual and are actually organic and more capable than human ones, or that they are magical black boxes.
Since it changes incentives and mechanics of the creativity market so much it forces us to reassess current approaches. I can't agree that mechanism behind this tech and the approach to IP is of any consequence. We don't make laws, norms and judgements for the sake of our tools.
It's ok to say that we're not ready to arrange things in a proper way yet, without letting everything slide on some arbitrary technicality.
Makes sense. There is very little in common between physical theft and unauthorised information copying. It may be an act worse than theft in ethical or other way, but it's a different thing. Crude theft analogy is good to colour it a particular way and evoke emotions, but harmful for a reasonable discussion.
Oh I agree, producing text by llms which is expected to be produced by human is at least deceiving and probably plagiarising. It's also skipping some important work, if we're talking about some person trying to detect it at all, usually in education context.
Student don't have to perform research or study for the given task, they need to acquire an example of text suitable for reproducing their style, text structure, to create an impression of being produced by hand, so the original task could be avoided. You have to have at least one corpus of your own work for this to work, or an adequate substitute. And you still could reject works by their content, but we are specifically talking about llm smell.
I was talking about the task of detecting llm generated text which is incredibly hard if any effort is made, while some people have an impression that it's trivially easy. It leads to unfair outcomes while giving false confidence to e.g. teachers that llms are adequately accounted for.
I don't believe it's possible at all if any effort is made beyond prompting chat-like interfaces to "generate X". Given a hand crafted corpus of text even current llms could produce perfect style transfer for a generated continuation. If someone believes it's trivially easy to detect, then they absolutely have no idea what they are dealing with.
I assume most people would make least amount of effort and simply prompt chat interface to produce some text, such text is rather detectable. I would like to see some experiments even for this type of detection though.
>An award worth between 15 and 30 percent of the total proceeds that IRS collects could be paid, if the IRS moves ahead based on the information provided
It's about safety and having a tomorrow. A lot of places where you won't live long without housing. You could live your whole life without strong connections to other people even if a miserable one.
Not having a major disruption to your whole life beyond your control is a meaningful thing, and a basic need. It could be reliable, predictable, stable source of income or saving, which allows you to rent without such concerns. It could be owning place to sleep, to eat, to invite friends.
You mean highest form of flattery? Literally participating and reflecting, trying to recreate and reinterpret is how humans integrate, show acceptance, make it part of themselves and culture. His art is not sacred, nor is it absolutely original, nor is it made in isolation from the world. Miura's legacy is sharing his reinterpretation of whatever. For it to exist there must be less elitist underground bunkers full of sacred IP which we unable to think about, discuss and share our interpretations of.
No hate, I simply can understand why paying for youtube feels different from paying for netflix. These are not some bulletprof arguments why nobody should pay money, it's just why I personally can feel it's different than paid content provider/producer.
>You're basically restricted to the tastes of Netflix's buyers.
Same as going to the cinema. I don't expect to see 5 minutes of figuring out camera settings and 2 hours of black screen. I completely miss how it's not a feature. At the same time I support variety and experiments with a content of any kind, it's just not that.
>You can easily skip these, not sure what the issue is here.
No issue. I use sponsorblock as I mentioned, so no manual intervention required. Why do I have to do it though.
>all change their inventory frequently due to licensing. It wasn't long ago that you could watch Sopranos on Amazon.
Did you know they announced removal of Sopranos beforehand? You could make an informed decision given a warning.
>it's a problem with the US legal system.
No it's not. But thank you for a perfect counter.
>YouTube has created tons of wealth for creators and has cut out tons of the usual Hollywood intermediaries.
Fair enough, there is some service being provided by youtube. They basically made all the content on platform possible.
>Additionally, there has never been a greater investment made on storing and distributing video like the one Google made on YouTube.
This one really stands out by exculding whole genres and not really adding anything interesting to work around.