throwsbooks

I would suggest the textbook Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach by Russell and Norvig. It's a good overview of the field and has been in circulation since 1995. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_Intelligence:_A_Modern_Approach

Here's a photo, as an example of how this book approaches the topic, in that there's an entire chapter on it with sections on four approaches, and that essentially even the researchers have been arguing about what intelligence is since the beginning.

But all of this has been under the umbrella of AI. Just because corporations have picked up on it, doesn't invalidate the decades of work done by scientists in the name of AI.

My favourite way to think of it is this: people have forever argued whether or not animals are intelligent or even conscious. Is a cat intelligent? Mine can manipulate me, even if he can't do math. Are ants intelligent? They use the same biomechanical constructs as humans, but at a simpler scale. What about bacteria? Are viruses alive?

If we can create an AI that fully simulates a cockroach, down to every firing neuron, does it mean it's not AI just because it's not simulating something more complex, like a mouse? Does it need to exceed a human to be considered AI?

I think you're conflating "intelligence" with "being smart".

Intelligence is more about taking in information and being able to make a decision based on that information. So yeah, automatic traffic lights are "intelligent" because they use a sensor to check for the presence of cars and "decide" when to switch the light.

Acting like some GPT is on the same level as a traffic light is silly though. On a base level, yes, it "reads" a text prompt (along with any messaging history) and decides what to write next. But that decision it's making is much more complex than "stop or go".

I don't know if this is an ADHD thing, but when I'm talking to people, sometimes I finish their sentences in my head as they're talking. Sometimes I nail it, sometimes I don't. That's essentially what chatGPT is, a sentence finisher that happened to read a huge amount of text content on the web, so it's got context for a bunch of things. It doesn't care if it's right and it doesn't look things up before it says something.

But to have a computer be able to do that at all?? That's incredible, and it took over 50 years of AI research to hit that point (yes, it's been a field in universities for a very long time, with most that time people saying it's impossible), and we only hit it because our computers got powerful enough to do it at scale.

Makes me think about how the BBC started a mastodon instance. If the CBC follows their example, then federation changes the relationship with social media, as it's sort of baked in...?

I don't think you need to wait years for user friendly Linux tbh! I recommend checking out Linux Mint. It's basically designed for people used to Windows and handles the technical stuff for you.

You can do almost everything through the GUI rather than the command line, so for things like updates, it'll show you a little notification in the corner by the clock like you're used to, you open up the software manager, and click the update button.

And most software nowadays can either be downloaded through an app store like interface, or by downloading an executable file from a website.

And if you've ever used a mac, there's a time machine equivalent built in (timeshift). So you can set up an automatic backup daily/weekly/etc and if you mess up something, in most cases you can revert back to a point when it wasn't messed up.

I say give it a shot, you can always go back if it's not for you! But usability has improved so much in the last few years.

Not the poster you're replying to, but I'm assuming you're looking for some sort of source that neural networks generate stuff, rather than plagiarize?

Google scholar is a good place to start. You'd need a general understanding of how NNs work, but it ends up leading to papers like this one, which I picked out because it has neat pictures as examples. https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.02200

What this one is doing is taking an input in the form of a face, and turning it into a cartoon. They call it an emoji, cause it's based on that style, but it's the same principle as how AI art is generated. Learn a style, then take a prompt (image or text) and do something with the prompt in the style.

Hey neat!

Just goes to show how history gets erased. Hopefully the green line gets built and we'll have even some of this coverage back.

Over the last five years, I'd click a link to Stack Overflow while googling, but I've never made an account because of the toxicity.

But yeah, chatGPT is definitely the nail in the coffin. Being able to give it my code and ask it to point out where the annoying bug is... is amazing.

The image in the post is of a yogi of some sort stating that electric cars are here to save the car industry first, and my impression of it is that it's suggesting that exploring the idea of electric cars is unwise.

And hell yeah, efficient transit and walkable cities are the goal. But while we're working on that goal, we should also focus on electrifying cars! Tackle the crisis in multiple ways. Because there's no way we're gonna stop using cars overnight, and if we can make cars more environmentally friendly while we taper off of them, that's a win.

Some cities, yes. LA is an example, right? And how they wrecked the street cars.

But not my city. Calgary was built as a stop on the Trans Canadian Railway, and that still exists, and there's an (okayish) light rail train system here that's slowly been built over the years and not torn down. Fully wind powered, too! Edit: our public transit kinda sucks though, I'm not saying we're great. My commute to the office would be over an hour by transit and twenty minutes by car, I'm lucky I work remote.

A majority of North American cities that have grown within the last hundred years (coinciding with cars) were built from the ground up with cars in mind as the primary form of commute.

Because as much as trains and buses are great for everyday commuter movement (and having amenities within walking distance is key as well), there's two issues:

• Changing the infrastructure and zoning of an existing city is much easier said than done. Ripping up concrete, tearing down existing business and homes to increase densification, that's a huge undertaking.
• Trains never replaced the horse drawn carriage. You can never fully eliminate the need for cars because sometimes you need to move something big like a couch. Even if there's less cars on the road, it'll never be 0, as this also includes things like ambulances, and fire trucks that can't rely on schedules.