Well, meowmeowbeanz has a good point, namely, Anonymous saying anything is meaningless. Because Anonymous is a not a group, at best it could be called a movement, at worst it’s just a name. In any case, anybody can claim to speak for them. Hence their statements are meaningless.

However, meowmeowbeanz’s post is also a barely coherent rant with overused emphasis. Which makes them seem mentally unwell. It’s like encountering somebody with a tinfoil hat ranting about how the earth is round.

Adding another recommendation: Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup

That .gif is a classic.

In addition to what frazorth said, you can change how a statement is interpreted by simply using a passive voice. Compare “Alice was hit by Bob” to “Bob hit Alice”. Both statements are identical, but the former is a lot less accusatory towards Bob. This technique is used when reporting about Police abuse, or about how the civilians in Gaza are treated.

Star wars; the last Jedi

The Holdo maneuver.

You can’t just throw out random Wikipedia links. For example, the Article on AGI explicitly says we don’t have a definition of what human level cognition actually is. Which is what the person you were replying to was saying. You’re doing a fallacious appeal to authority, except that the authority doesn’t agree with you.

Thanks, I’ll try that.

Protip: Set yourself up with an offside server before turning on your creators.

Idea: Governments maintain a list of entities that are evading the law like that, and then doesn’t prosecute people who are accused of crimes against such entities. The idea being that if you place yourself outside of the law’s reach, you also place yourself outside of the law’s protection.

How so? Can you list some examples of upvoted things that are wildly wrong?

4 hours in, can still read it. Agree with your assessment, too.

It’s sort of a strange approach, because this will leave you with the workers who can’t find employment elsewhere.

One easy way would be to make organ donation opt out instead of opt in. As in, if you do nothing, you’re an organ donor if you end up brain-dead, and if you don’t want to, you have to explicitly opt out. Alternatively, we could just say any brain-dead person may have their organs harvested, regardless of what they declared while still alive. After all, you don’t need the organs anymore once you’re brain-dead. (I’m specifying brain-dead, because if you’re completely dead, then the organs are also useless)

So, what do you not like about the Freetube’s UI and UX?

So you’re a sadist, but you try to convince yourself it’s okay because you only want to torture people you think deserve it. Of course, no one deserves to be tortured.

Yeah, it does. Perfect opsec is impossible even with encryption.

Is it supposed to be a stuffed animal?

That said, it’s misleading and inaccurate to state that neural networks are just statistics. In fact they are substantially more than just advanced statistics. Certainly statistics is a component—but so too is probability, calculus, network/graph theory, linear algebra, not to mention computer science to program, tune, and train and infer them. Information theory (hello, entropy) plays a part sometimes.

What I meant when I said that they are advanced statistics is that that is what they do. I know that a lot of disciplines play a part in creating them. I know it’s incredible complicated, it took me quite a while to wrap my head around what the back-propagation algorithm.

I also know that neural networks can do some really cool stuff. Recognizing tumors, for example. But it’s equally dangerous to overestimate them, so we have to be aware of their limitations.

Edit: All that being said, I do recognize that you have spent much more time learning about and working with neural networks than I have.

The thing with AI is, what the term today refers to most often is neural networks, which are really advanced statistics. And the thing is, to get more precise statistics, you need exponentially more data. And of course the marginal utility decays exponentially. So exponentially increasing marginal expenses meet exponentially decaying marginal utility.

In addition, this tactic will result in the best employees leaving first, because they’ll get employed somewhere else.