Right, that’s kind of what I’m saying, the book mentions a person with a name and location (ish). Then finding a guy there when the name is fairly common does not equate all things said about him to be true. Far from it it seems. Especially if the book has fantastical claims outside the realm of reality about said person and is inconsistent on his story.

At best you get a King Arthur story, was there a king or ruler in said period for (part of) England? Probably. Did he become king because he pulled out a magical sword from the rock? I would assume not.

There are even stories that Arthur never died and will return one day…

Since it was a fairly common name, you might as well say John from Richmond is a confirmed individual.

Here in the Netherlands the “pigeon racing” sport is still relatively alive, but does have an aging target group. Pigeons are driven somewhere many miles anyway, (well km’s) and released, first home gets a price.

There are breeders and trainers etc.

Also, Gangnam style. 13 years ago.

Children, which to me is everyone born in the 2005+ are already turning 20. Hell, the iPhone can already vote.

Steve Jobs also famously only made one dollar a year. Because normal income is taxed much more than giving yourself stock and calling it unrealized gains. You cannot be a billionaire without being a parasite.

That would be nice but as the “proud owner of medical issues” it’s much more often: “You have this, we don’t know why you have it, this is how we can manage it”.

You still want your doctor to be knowledgeable of course, but you also want them to use the best tools at their disposal. Most of them probably couldn’t tell you how an mri machine works exactly either.

You don’t always have to know how it works to rely on it. Most people could not tell you how a computer works but they are able to do better work.

We can verify that it’s better in some tasks than people. E.g give doctors and the AI 1000 MRI scans of potential cancer patients and it can determine it more accurate than doctors. So there they already are a help.

It’s already used in advancing different fields, for example reading texts of ancient burned scrolls without opening the scroll since that would break them.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/feb/05/ai-helps-researchers-read-ancient-scroll-burned-to-a-crisp-in-vesuvius-eruption

But also medicine creation etc.

And with learning, yeah like books, they help you to learn faster but are not a requirement. Same here I can learn much faster now. But I will verify what it tells me.

— But I’m not sure if all of that outweighs the shit. 💩 The genie is already out of the bottle, no putting it back.

I think AI so far is detrimental to society.

• It made it too easy to flood the world with bullshit.

• Also it will make tracking peoples behaviors much easier while keeping plausible deniability on levels that past horrible regimes could only dream about.

• It will be used to make replacing workers more easy.

• It is being used to deny more healthcare (eg Luigie’s case)

Pro’s

• Can be used for good (eg in the medical field) by finding issues sooner and making better cures

• Using AI to actually learn though is a great tool.

• Other scientific advancements

—

All in all I think it with social media is one of the biggest reasons the US is in the state it is.

The training corpus of these large models seem to be “the internet YOLO”. Where it’s fine for them to download every book and paper under the sun, but if a normal person does it.

Believe it or not:

Totally, I missed it until someone pointed it out in the comments, assumptions about a “consistent world” are kind of baked in. Your brain might implicitly flip it just to make sense.

It doesn’t sound super surprising that different malformations in the brain even though caused by the same underlying condition can result in very varied effects on behavior.

Good stuff though. (The research)

Right, indeed. 😊

Maybe they should have, since this is definitely something it picks up.

My input was “what is wrong with this text if any”

Claude 3.5

There is an error in this text. Let me point out the inconsistency: It states that Lewis “lost his hearing in his right ear” but then mentions he adapted to “relying solely on his right ear.” This is contradictory because…

Either way, losing hearing as a musician must suck extra.

The comment section there is a shitshow with all those recently generated nameless accounts.

I was looking around for new monitors and many are “smart now too” so you can watch Netflix. I dunno, but I already have a device attached which can do that much better, and more!

The Google Graveyard will be littered with the bodies of people now. Fuck them, move to something better for the world.

Birds had it right all along with one waste exit.