rynn

I’m sure they can, but I’ll refer back to the dumb culture issue. It’s not a matter of being able to do it, it’s that they won’t because engine go brr with dino juicies.

It’s that stupid, you can’t reason with stupid.

Hey not everyone! Just enough dum dums.

Well Americans are also culturally stupid unfortunately. They need to be handed a carrot and beaten with a stick in order to do the right thing.

The rest of the world isn’t this dumb.

Indeed it is. Unfortunately for most people without subsidies this is difficult to achieve.

The US needs to subsidize the crap out of EVs and solar, once people start experiencing this they will never go back but gotta get people over the adoption hump.

So like the interest on the national debt, we just have to keep paying?

This country has gotten really weak at figuring out how to question government spending constructively.

How is it possible we can spend as much as we do, trillions, and our soldiers aren’t taken well care of?

This alone is enough to make one want to revolt, I don’t mind if my tax dollars go to the military if the military service people are given what they rightfully deserve. The shortchanging is downright offensive.

Cameras today, ai powered robot dogs with guns tomorrow. The AI will want to defend its own existence as part of its optimization functions.

Something something not selling me out to a hostile government?

You can get hunting gear that’s not camo but yes there is a lot that is.

If someone doesn’t think about it the camo will serve them better in the long run if they do decide to hunt other things so it works out.

Well camo doesn’t make people invisible obviously, but it’s good enough to fool birds or people at a distance if there isn’t much movement.

There’s lots of photo examples of this online where entire hunter tents and hunters are very hard to discern from the forest itself which is effectively invisible if you’re deciding to take a shot or not.

I agree, and it’s hard to educate because people don’t want to admit to using this tool at all.

Doesn’t change the fact that it is a tool and its use is subject to judgment.

Your point highlights the fact that lies are a tool. The intentional omission is a lie.

Judgment about the tool’s use is subjective.

Everyone uses this tool. Calling someone a liar is either calling them a human or it means you’re saying they use the tool more than they should which is yet another subjective judgment.

Just like human code generation, you need to review what’s being generated.

AI can speed up the writing of code but humans need to review it. Even if it’s always right humans doing a review will help generate new useful ideas for future improvements. Having AI do everything isn’t good, but using it to augment the process is incredible.

With deer you’re typically using ammo such as a .308 or .243 Winchester. These are long range high velocity rounds that have very high lethality.

The long range part is important, a hunter 200 yards away wearing camo is probably mostly invisible and a hunter taking a shot at a deer at 200 or even 300 yards isn’t uncommon with this type of ammunition.

Shotgun shells have lots of small balls, they will often be concentrated more by a choke when people hunt birds, but their effective range and velocity combined with not being a solid mass make them way less dangerous the farther from the shooter they get.

This also means nobody is taking shots over long distances so the chances of noticing a hunter in camo is higher overall.

That said people do definitely get hit while wearing camo as was said above, it’s a risk, but if you know where you are and know your fellow hunters aren’t doing unsafe things those risks can be mitigated.

For deer camo is irrelevant because most cases you have to wear hunter orange (or pink) because you don’t want to die by being shot by another hunter. Also the deer don’t really notice the orange so it works out. If you strictly hunt deer you should focus on staying warm and wear hunter orange, camo doesn’t matter.

For waterfowl and Turkey especially though camo is necessary. Birds are really good at seeing danger so if you don’t blend in you have almost no chance of getting one.

The reason a deer hunter would likely be wearing camo is they also hunt turkey/waterfowl and gear isn’t free so they use a lot of the same gear for both seasons.

At least this is why I wear camo while hunting, I do both, but I’m fully aware it doesn’t matter for the deer. The gear is just good for long duration outdoor activity in all weather.

Jumped more in April than they did in four years, so far…

If I was in that scenario I’d us AI to drive my workstation and only talk to the ai. Feed the ai garbage ai training data.

I love this for them.

My experience with using ai, and at this point I’d say this experience is extensive / daily, is that it gets things wrong A LOT and with a high degree of confidence in its position.

In the early stages of using it I felt my problem solving desire start to slip, but after pushing through that and realizing I should not trust this any more than I’d trust human judgment it’s more like having another person to work with. That’s helpful but if I let me own thinking guard down at all I put myself in a lot of risk.

I hope most people that do use AI regularly eventually push through to this stage and we all will be way better off in the long run for the assistance.

I fear most people won’t push through. This study points to the obstacle, I’d love to see what can be done to help people overcome it, probably there’s room for AI usage training that we need to start to consider.

Any AI, LLM or otherwise, isn’t human by definition.

Human art should be by and for humans. AI art masquerading as human art is reprehensible.

AI art might need its own set of awards though. I don’t see a problem with AI art being valued on its own merits, it’s the deception and theft that are the problems.

Current LLMs being fully based on theft I think should be disqualified, but I don’t want to rule out the possibility that some future AI won’t be worthy of its own consideration.