Anything we can provide is just a drop in the ocean of data they already have. Plus, this was how image generation worked before we got diffusion models (see “generative adversarial networks”) and they never reached the level of image quality that diffusion models did.

It takes one day to do the actual voting. It takes a lot more time to figure out who to vote for.

Better question: Where do you put the dx?

Why would we need anyone to buy things? Remember that money is an abstraction for resources. If you can do everything with AI, then you already have all the resources you need. Whether or not someone else needs what you produce is irrelevant when you already have access to everything you could want.

It’s not completely subjective. Think about it from an information theory perspective. We want a word that maximizes the amount of information conveyed, and there are many situations where you need a word that distinguishes AGI, LLMs, deep learning, reinforcement learning, pathfinding, decision trees and the like from the outputs of other computer science subfields. “AI” has historically been that word, so redefining it without a replacement means we don’t have a word for this thing we want to talk about anymore.

I refuse to replace a single commonly used word in my vocabulary with a full sentence. If anyone wants to see this changed, then offer an alternative.

I get the impression that many drug dealers would be happy to take gift cards as payment.

Ah, makes sense. Thanks

I’m not disagreeing. I’m confused because I don’t see how it’s relevant to the comment you responded to.

I’m so confused by this comment. Are you trying to say that putting a live animal under extreme pressure and zapping them would constitute animal cruelty?

I’m trying to help OP reach an answer to their question, therefore the definitions I’m working with are the same as that of OP. What I personally believe should be categorized as a “higher being” is irrelevant because if it’s different from OP’s definition, it won’t help them reach their desired answer.

I don’t think OP is asking about the existence of humans, or animals, or any other physical entity. If they were, you can trivially say that you exist, and therefore god exists. That’s unless you want to go into ontology and question what it means to “exist”, which I’m pretty sure also isn’t what OP intended.

Anything that you would call a “god”.

If I give an ostensive definition, I would say it includes the beings like the Abrahamic god, or Olympian gods, and exclude humans, animals, bacteria, the planet we live on, and objects we handle in our day to day lives. I’ll tentatively draw the line at any being that is not bound to the laws of physics as we understand them today.

Occam’s razor doesn’t mean that the simplest explanation is always true, but rather that it’s usually the most likely to be true.

Using simplicity as a measure of how likely something is to be true always felt a little anthropocentric. How do we determine that something is simple if not via the systems and abstractions that are easy for human minds to comprehend?

If you’re talking specifically about the Abrahamic God, sure. But if it’s about the existence of any higher being, then there’s no contradiction here.

Yes, that one. The difference between all the candidates falls in a range of about 3 percentage points, meaning that everyone has near majority support.

Did you read the article? It says everyone polls approximately the same as Biden.

Or, make it fade more and more for each “unique” visitor. Make sure it hits after they start their marketing campaign.

I think this should apply in general, not just in this thread. Down votes are reserved for comments that do not positively contribute to the conversation.

I’ve always interpreted “why don’t we just X?” as a shorter way of expressing “I think I would like X. Is this a good idea? If not, why? If yes, what are the barriers to making it happen?”

The “what would you do” type of questions where everyone shares their subjective opinions is exactly the type of question asklemmy is for. Nostupidquestions is for questions seeking objective answers.