It is literally forced upon you. If you are a fully grown adult, you have every right to use a device you own as you wish. But Apple and the ever-increasingly Orwellian UK government disagree. Your device is crippled until you consent to surveillance. You are forced to hand over your identity to be allowed to use the device you bought and paid for as you wish, and now your every move on that device is linked directly to you.
> But Apple and the ever-increasingly Orwellian UK government disagree.
You misplace your judgment on Apple. They didn't make the first move, they are responding to a government of a country they wish to continue operating in and made a business decision to start working on the feature and get ahead of it before governments start demanding they build the feature in specific ways (ie, the demand that Apple build a government backdoor, but turns out they can not be forced to build the government software, only be forced to turn over what they have). Building it first their way is actively doing something, it's controlling the implementation, while others seem to want to wait to be given specs by said government. It's happening either way. If you don't like it take the activism to the government, you know, the entity that is actually forcing this on people.
As an aside:
> You are forced to hand over your identity to be allowed to use the device you bought and paid for as you wish, and now your every move on that device is linked directly to you.
> Your device is crippled until you consent to surveillance.
For Apple devices it already was and you already have (sure, not if you are part of the small handful of people that never connect the device to telecoms or the internet or any networking, or use any apps other than preinstalled/offline jailbroken ones).But if the argument was in good faith, we know that is not how the majority of people use these devices.
> It is literally forced upon you.
It literally is not. You are not "forced" to do anything, no one is forced to buy or use the device. No one is "forced" to update iOS. There are alternatives, if you don't like the those alternatives and only want an updated current or new Apple device without age verification, well now you have a choice to make. Or make no choice, the choice is yours.
The AI model is likely trained on Stack Overflow posts, or otherwise related content from wherever off the internet, so most likely it will have ripped off enough hand-written posts or articles on how to quit Vim. So of course it can regurgitate the required keystrokes on command.
And will the writers of those posts, who contributed their knowledge to help out their fellow humans, get a fraction of a penny for the hundreds and thousands and millions of dollars of profit the AI corps are making off the backs of their labour? I somehow doubt it.
I wouldn't be surprised if a fair majority of them have been taught to see goto as nothing but a vestige of the 70s which should never be used under any circumstances except as a meme or to deliberately obfuscate code.
I have recently become quite fond of goto-based error handling and find it a lot cleaner and more readable than the if-else-mountains you otherwise end up with. I just make sure to leave a comment with a link to xkcd.com/292 so anyone else reading it knows I'm aware of what I'm doing. Now with this URL trick I can do both in one line. :)
Any time you want to sign up for any "open social" platform, you have to rush to claim your domain name. If someone else got there first, too bad. And that domain name applies to every app using this protocol. So no chance to claim it on another app, ever.
So what, exactly, is the difference between this and internet handles? In fact, isn't this worse?
I suppose the difference is that you only have to rush to claim your domain name (the DNS kind) once and then you get to use it for all "open social" platforms rather than doing that for your username on each platform.
OTOH I read the success rate is only 50-50 at detecting it. AI text does leave some clues, like those infamous em dashes, but those can be patched with some simple edits. AI images are more obvious because many are intentionally overwrought.
It depends on what the AI is trying to do. If you write a novel and ask the AI to improve the prose it becomes very obvious if you've dealt with AI prose before.
The quoted part is really amazing. The author of the article just makes claims and clearly hasn't been exposed to any real art or music education. I suppose to some extent he means taste in programming, but anyone who is writing such an article does not have that either.
We can also talk about taste in articles, which seems to have degenerated to "any pro-AI article will be voted up and defended".
I'm not sure if this counts as a pro-AI article, but I agree. It's void of substance.
The most ironic part:
> When someone preaches about AI taste, ask them to show you their work from before AI. If they can’t demonstrate taste in their pre-AI work, they’re not qualified to lecture you about it now.
reply