HamAdams posted:

chat with cyberhunks in your area

Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:

been looking at this thing for five minutes now and i still have absolutely no idea how it works. drone guillotine? oversized cyberpunk flyswatter? some electronic jamming thing?

Jonny 290 posted:

tag me but only if you can do so without loving up my current setup

also missed opportunity for `Cyberpunk 2023 And Me` but all good

tmesis posted:

minidisc in the dash, or use the aux cable to plug in your ATRAC player

Jonny 290 posted:

god when i got my big LG OLED, i treated that thing like it was a nuclear warhead or something. i was so scared of dropping or breaking it. they're Too Thin

Alan Smithee posted:

Just show him the namshub of enki

Agile Vector posted:

i was trying to look up comparisons on video compression a few weeks ago and it was an exercise in frustration because every site was ML soup descriptions of the formats, then a plug for an overpriced and incredibly generic ui slapped on what was presumably ffmpeg

Agile Vector posted:

ddg kinda started to crush it by not being as well-tuned/gamable, as well as having bang shortcuts to outright redirect and search on various sites instead of coaxing google into doing it for you

Alan Smithee posted:

https://twitter.com/JasonColavito/status/1611710986871767041?s=20&t=cN8alEbHkkLxMELPFfdYgA

distortion park posted:

my resting face is very grumpy and I can't really smile well, everyone thinks I hate them (it's true but that's not the point)

haveblue posted:

rotor posted:

its an extreme sport, like BASE jumping or running with teh bulls at pamplona.

rotor posted:

i guess. i mostly just wanted to make the joke about a lunch date with megan traynor.

Achmed Jones posted:

i'm coming off far more abrasive than i really intend to here i think - apologies for that. i'm trying to say this as friendly joshing and think i might be fuckin it up

Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:

i mean, i do need new shirts anyway since the holes in most of mine are getting too big even for me

Jabor posted:

you might find this take from a fellow educator interesting: https://acoup.blog/2023/02/17/collections-on-chatgpt/

the author, despite (or perhaps because of?) being in classics rather than a tech-adjacent field, seems to have a much better idea of what chatgpt is actually capable of than most people i've seen talking about it

quote:

It is not, as we do, storing definitions or associations between those words and their real world referents, nor is it storing a perfect copy of the training material for future reference. ChatGPT does not sit atop a great library it can peer through at will; it has read every book in the library once and distilled the statistical relationships between the words in that library and then burned the library.

Chris Knight posted:

the gently caress around and find out model works as well today as it did for Plato

haveblue posted:

his point is that when you read harry potter you associated the concepts of wizard and broom while chatgpt just associated the words "wizard" and "broom". to chatgpt they are not symbols, they are atomic elements that tend to occur in certain arrangements. if I wrote that harry is a hgkjrhasful who rides an ahjwtqy, a human reader would immediately choke on it, at the very least because those terms are not defined elsewhere in the work and more likely because it's obvious I'm just banging on the keyboard. the statistical model underlying chatgpt cannot reject inputs on this sort of basis and that's a difference between the kinds of information processing it and real students do according to this piece. it will happily internalize the garbage and write you a whole new story about the magical adventures the hgkjrhasfuls have with their ahjwtqys even if neither of those are defined anywhere in the entire text of Harry Potter and the Ffgadjghkan Jcoqsklhabdfkjczkns

RokosCockatrice posted:

If chatgpt's essays didn't suck, they would be an invaluable resource for learning about a subject and its related fields, and as a source for your own process of synthesizing ideas and trying to communicate them.

RokosCockatrice posted:

That's not right, chatgpt and all large language models see plenty of gibberish and tune the conceptual value of this gibberish to zero during the learning process (rejecting it).

You can say that chatgpt doesn't understand "concepts" and it only works with "words", but it's not clear that concepts and the statistical interrelation of words (and more exactly, the structured, statistically weighted connections between words, phrases, sentences, and groups of sentences) is fundamentally different than a concept. To go further than harry potter, I can tell you about zorblots being bigger than zangos, and you only need words to form these concepts of two things that don't exist. There are no pictures, but does that mean blind people can't have concepts? Obviously you don't need to directly experience things to have a concept of them, as zorblots don't exist, so that can't be the reason why relations between words and concepts are different.

explicitly using it as input to your own research and synthesizing processes. This is something that seems obvious to me (so it's probably wrong), but if chatgpt was less full of poo poo (i.e. more than 90% right on factual issues), writing an on why everything is called postmodernism would be aided by asking chatgpt to write essays on A) what it thinks the answer to this questions is B) what the extent of things called postmodernism is C) What the history of these things are and why they took on this nomenclature etc etc. Using these as summaries to work from for your own research, and then dissecting it to build your own arguments, I think this would make your own work better.