Perspectivist

joined 1 week ago
[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 1 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

But there are also index funds that are not ETFs.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 3 points 5 hours ago

Apparently I'm old enough to be a Lemmy user's dad.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 8 points 5 hours ago (4 children)

Find an ETF index fund that’s highly diversified across both sectors and regions, with total expenses under 0.5%, and set up an automatic monthly investment into it. It’s the boring way to invest - but unless you’ve got a crystal ball and can predict the future, I wouldn’t start gambling on individual stocks. This is basically the same advice Warren Buffett would give you.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 2 points 10 hours ago

The few things I'm not buying out of principle are such that I wouldn't even know if someone else bought it or not. But no, I don't care. There's nothing I'm not buying because I think the company that produces it is literally Hitler.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 2 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

You mean french fries sauce because that's all it's good for.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I haven’t claimed that it is. The point is, the only two plausible scenarios I can think of where we don’t eventually reach AGI are: either we destroy ourselves before we get there, or there’s something fundamentally mysterious about the biological computer that is the human brain - something that allows it to process information in a way we simply can’t replicate any other way.

I don’t think that’s the case, since both the brain and computers are made of matter, and matter obeys the laws of physics. But it’s at least conceivable that there could be more to it.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Finland recently passed a law prohibiting under 15 year olds from riding electric scooters and similar vehicles. Up untill now, the average age of the people hospitalized for accidents with these has been 12 years.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 4 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Did you genuinely not understand the point I was making, or are you just being pedantic? "Silicon" obviously refers to current computing substrates, not a literal constraint on all future hardware. If you’d prefer I rewrite it as "in non-biological substrates," I’m happy to oblige - but I have a feeling you already knew that.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 32 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Älä välitä, ei se villekään välittänyt, vaikka sen väliaikaiset välihousut jäi väliaikaisen välitystoimiston väliaikaisen välioven väliin.

Rough translation: Don’t worry about it - Ville didn’t worry either when his temporary long johns got caught in the temporary side door of the temporary temp agency.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The fact that you have to completely rewrite my argument into a strawman before you can attack it tells me all I need to know about who I’m dealing with here. Have a great day.

[–] Perspectivist@feddit.uk 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

We’re not even remotely close.

That’s just the other side of the same coin whose flip side claims AGI is right around the corner. The truth is, you couldn’t possibly know either way.

 

I see a huge amount of confusion around terminology in discussions about Artificial Intelligence, so here’s my quick attempt to clear some of it up.

Artificial Intelligence is the broadest possible category. It includes everything from the chess opponent on the Atari to hypothetical superintelligent systems piloting spaceships in sci-fi. Both are forms of artificial intelligence - but drastically different.

That chess engine is an example of narrow AI: it may even be superhuman at chess, but it can’t do anything else. In contrast, the sci-fi systems like HAL 9000, JARVIS, Ava, Mother, Samantha, Skynet, or GERTY are imagined as generally intelligent - that is, capable of performing a wide range of cognitive tasks across domains. This is called Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).

One common misconception I keep running into is the claim that Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT are “not AI” or “not intelligent.” That’s simply false. The issue here is mostly about mismatched expectations. LLMs are not generally intelligent - but they are a form of narrow AI. They’re trained to do one thing very well: generate natural-sounding text based on patterns in language. And they do that with remarkable fluency.

What they’re not designed to do is give factual answers. That it often seems like they do is a side effect - a reflection of how much factual information was present in their training data. But fundamentally, they’re not knowledge databases - they’re statistical pattern machines trained to continue a given prompt with plausible text.

 

I was delivering an order for a customer and saw some guy messing with the bikes on a bike rack using a screwdriver. Then another guy showed up, so the first one stopped, slipped the screwdriver into his pocket, and started smoking a cigarette like nothing was going on. I was debating whether to report it or not - but then I noticed his jacket said "Russia" in big letters on the back, and that settled it for me.

That was only the second time in my life I’ve called the emergency number.

view more: next ›