. I am not talking about other types of machine learning.

Then you are making up you own conversation instead of following the thread?

The person presented a specific task to an AI, where does a chatbot come in? You seem to be confused about what Ai is, and that’s what I pointed out, thanks for making it clear.

Yet that wasn’t the point they even made! Lmfao nice reaching there.

Those would be the same type of points a human would make to accomplish the task.

You seem to be ignoring the facts. It was told the image was fake, and told to explain why. Even a human that knows it’s real would still do what was presented to it.

The person told the ai a very specific thing to do, with not room for variance, it wasn’t even stated as a question, they made a demand and any human in the same position would act the same way. If you’re expecting to have to tell a human a 100 times that “yes the image is real, can you do the task presented” is more efficient and better then it being done?

Now you could also present the task as both being able to question it, the ai would follow instructions better.

Back to situation one, while with the human you would be constantly interrupted, is that a good employee or subject? Or one you would immediately replace as it can’t even follow basic instructions? Ai or human, you would point to do the task at hand, yes critical thinking is important, but not for this stupid task. Stop applying instructions and context that never existed in the first place. In a one for one example, the Ai would question too, if you can’t understand this, you shouldn’t be commenting on Ai.

Ai sucks, but don’t ignore reality to make your asinine point.

But they didn’t ask it a question… They specifically told it the image was fake and explain why. That’s not a question, that’s a task.

clearly, they asked it a question that average joe would do

Clearly (as you so incorrectly pointed out a question….)The lack of basic reading comprehension being shown here exactly explains the issue perfectly.

It’s not people relying on it, it’s people using it for stuff it’s not meant for!

It’s not a conversation tool when you present it with a specific task….

Do you not understand even the basic premise of how ai works?

Then what are doing? Complaining it did exactly what you instructed it to do?

What else did you expect?

I get circle jerking against ai is hip and fun, but this isn’t even one of the valid errors it makes. This is just pure human error lmfao.

Why would it have to? It and the person doing the task already knows to do any task put in front of it. It’s one of a hundred photos for all it and the person knows.

You are extending context and instructions that doesn’t exist. The situation would be, both are doing whatever task is presented to them. A human asking would fail and be removed. They failed order number one.

You could also setup a situation where the ai and human were both capable of asking. The ai won’t do what it’s not asked, that’s the comprehension lacking.

Wait, you’re surprised it did what you asked of it?

There’s a massive difference between asking if something is fake, and telling it it is and asking why.

A person would make the same type of guesses and explanations if given the same task.

All this is showing is, you and ALOT of other people just don’t know enough about AI to be able to have a conversation about it.

It even says “suggests” in it, it’s making no claim that it’s real or fake. The lack of basic comprehension is the issue here.

Never live west of work? Unless you’re job hopping frequently, there’s a few choices you can make while picking a house to make life easier.

Get a south facing door so the snow can melt, live east of work so you’re not driving into the sun, don’t live in a valley. Stuff like that.

You’re still driving a car while stopped mate. This is the reasoning that leads to people drinking while they are stopped. They aren’t technically driving… but it’s obviously not safe and shouldn’t be done.

Yet people condone it? Fucking hell.

How did you get that point from my comment?

So… that means one side of Gaza is sensible and the other isn’t? That’s the only take after their last comment.

Just pointing out that with their last comment, their other point can be taken as one side being sensible, while the other isn’t.

What does that have to do with boot licking?

Fantastic point, right up until that last sentence. But I guess people just want to circle jerk eh?

Man your comment was really impartial and well thought out, until that last comment. So close…

restaurant manager -manager

That shouldn’t turn up no results. That poster is assuming A LOT. It also looked like a blog post and is 30% ads, what kind of source is that? The link provided by Schmidt shows that most Booleans do work on Google and is newer than your posted link as well, as well as provided by one of their engineers… so they should be taken as more knowledgeable then… a blog post to from a random person.

Because the search will turn up results that aren’t related to managers, there will absolutely be results. The only people who would assume there would be no results are people who think search engines only return proper results, and incorrectly assume Boolean are true AND, OR and NOT. When they have never been.

The issue in case you haven’t figured it out, is assuming how stuff should work and being ignorant instead of learning.

Most Booleans work on Google and have existed for decades, claiming they “don’t” or “don’t work” just means you don’t understand what the point of them has always been.

I am a compliance expert.

Yet you claim there is two party consent for video, won’t provide anything to support that claim, and the one link you did specifically says it doesn’t…

. I too am confident in my assessment of the legal situation.

People can be confidently wrong, like in this case…

Awwwwhhh I upset muffin by using logic and reason to refute them.

Is it so odd, that someone knows how to read and understand code and law books? It’s part of any tradesperson training.

I know it’s not a thing, from plenty of research into my own camera systems, and I am confident that I know the results I found are correct, because I know how to understand code and law books.

And no it doesn’t, but the lack of any results shows that you’re full of fucking shit.

Again, just because someone swears doesn’t mean they are being aggressive! It’s common repertoire for a lot of working people! Sorry princess!

I’ve never heard of that before… and Google shows zero results for “states with two party consent for video recording” all links are for audio… what state… please… how many times do I need to ask nicely so we can solve this?

Just because you’re wrong and got called out doesn’t mean the other person is being aggressive lmfao.

No… your link even specifies that….

L

O

Fucking

L

It’s the internet, people can swear dude.

That applies to audio… not video recordings mate.

Why are you telling me to chill? Because I used a bloody swear word…?

What country? I’m sure there’s exceptions that you don’t know about, the laws normally don’t disallow their use, it’s in how the data is stored.

A security system that doesn’t record, but is watched by someone would be legal anywhere for example. Just the fact that there’s one, means sweet fuck all.