• 17 Posts
  • 226 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 22nd, 2023

help-circle









  • That’s an interesting perspective actually

    Maybe it’s because of who’s giving them? If my little cousin gave me an AI Christmas card, I’d be happier than if a stranger gave me one on the street. (Though I’d feel bummed if they didn’t even marker in a single custom sentence)

    i.e. higher standards of creativity/effort from a stranger than from a family member.

    Also the stranger isn’t stuffing a tenner in the card lmao





  • fool@programming.devtoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldhow much power does your system need?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I forgive 'em cuz watt hours are a disgusting unit in general

    idea what unit
    speed change in position over time meters per second m/s
    acceleration change in speed over time meters per second, per second m/s/s=m/s²
    force acceleration applied to each of unit of mass kg * m/s²
    work acceleration applied along a distance, which transfers energy kg * m/s² * m = kg * m²/s²
    power work over time kg * m² / s³
    energy expenditure power level during units of time (kg * m² / s³) * s = kg * m²/s²

    Work over time, × time, is just work! kWh are just joules (J) with extra steps! Screw kWh, I will die on this hill!!! Raaah



  • Ty for feedback :>

    Your paragraph read well. I definitely agree – grammar with risks, outside of hyper-formal sitches, is just stylized diction. ChatGPT could scarcely come up with an e.e. cummings poem (just tested now, it never gets the style about right), nor dare to abuse parentheses, nor remove cruft for conciseness (e.g. to start a sentence with “Kind of changed” instead of “This kind of changes” for compression (woot)). It’s a “wrong” but not quite “wrong”, and I’m glad that “riskless” manages to carry that feeling

    And I edit a lot too :) it’s the “post-email-send clarity” effect




  • edit: updated accordingly for clarity

    Ah, I mean proper grammar as in formal, largely riskless grammar. For example, AI wouldn’t connect

    monolingual + educated + have access to technology

    with pluses, like a human would.

    Not sure how I’d phrase that though. Maybe “perfect, risklessly formal grammar” as I just tried to call it? (i.e. if AI trainers consider using +‘es a “risk”, as opposed to staying formal and spick n’ span clean).

    Perfect grammar is humanly possible but there is some scrutiny that can be applied to GPT-style grammar, especially in the context of the casually-toned web (where 100%ed grammar isn’t strictly necessary!). Just… defining this state well is tough to me. :|