Yup, because it’s absolutely impossible for China to change policies that would encourage higher birth rate or open up immigration. Enjoy masturbating to your China collapse fantasies.

The real question is how long before they end up being banned in the west like we already see happening with Chinese phones and EVs.

really on the nose

What I find most unfortunate is that these scam companies convinced people that you can make AI speech detectors in the first place. Like the reason LLMs structure text in a certain way is because these are the patterns in human text that they’ve been trained on.

yeah that would work too assuming the disk was made out of sufficiently hard material that won’t degrade over time

Probably just political embarrassment for Japan. You gotta remember that Japan committed large scale atrocities all across Asia, and they don’t like it when these things are dredged up and people are reminded of what Japan did and never apologized for.

For the benefit of other people who might be reading this thread. You’re the subject here, not a conversation partner.

Yeah, I don’t think billions of years is really a meaningful metric here. It’s more that it’s a stable medium where we could record things that will persist for an indefinite amount of time without degradation.

Even a chatbot could come up with a better comeback. 🤣

I mean, you can always make new hardware. The idea of media that basically lasts forever is really useful in my opinion. We currently don’t have anything that would last as long as regular paper. Most of the information we have is stored on volatile media. Using something like this to permanently record accumulated knowledge like scientific papers, technology blueprints, and so on, would be a very good idea in my opinion.

What you’re doing here is called sophistry. You’re intentionally trying to derail the discussion from the actual substantive points. It’s rather artless and transparent.

Stop playing a victim. If you don’t want people to call out your bullshit then don’t post nonsense. It’s that simple. The only one being emotional here is you. Feel free to actually address what I said instead of whinging.

The whole demographic crisis in China is largely based on misinterpretation of the data for the benefit of low intellect racists

• https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2108900118
• https://asiatimes.com/2023/07/chinas-demographic-doomsayers-cite-the-wrong-data/

I can only go by what you say here which is frankly nonsense. I’ve explained to you that any serious software project relies on practices like tests and code reviews to ensure quality of the code being produced. Whether the code is written by a tool or a human is entirely beside the point. It should be treated the same way. Anybody who’s actually written code knows that humans are fallible and make plenty of mistakes, so your argument about hallucinations applies to human written code exactly the same way. The way to deal with it in both cases is by having contracts that the code fulfills. My intention is to correct misinformation that people such as yourself are spreading.

You haven’t made any arguments that warrant counterpoints. Go do your trolling somewhere else.

yeah, but that’s a fantasy model that can’t work in practice

Incidentally, manual moderation is much easier to do on a federated network where each individual instance doesn’t grow huge. Some people complaining that Lemmy isn’t growing to the size of Reddit, but I see that as a feature myself. Smaller communities tend to be far more interesting and are much easier to moderate than giant sites.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt initially assuming you simply haven’t used these tools. Now, you’ve come back and emphatically stated that you have. Given that what you describe is not how these tools work, it’s very clear that you are being dishonest by your own admission. Now you’re just using sophistry to paper over that.

I didn’t make any inaccurate comparisons. The whole deterministic LLM argument was just the straw man you were making. I’m merely pointing out your dishonesty here, if you choose to perceive it as a personal attack that’s on you.

I guess using personal attacks like a child is all you can do when you don’t have any actual point to make.