Tar_Alcaran

Specifically, he would probably point out that the slave states really had an awfully small economy compared to the free states,

Both things can be true though. The money from black slaves flowed into the pockets of white slaveowners AND it was economically a very dumb move.

If I steal a thousand bucks, and lose nine hundred and fifty while running away, I haven’t benefited much, but that doesn’t change the damage inflicted.

You don’t “have to”. It can help reduce inflamation in the gums if your cat already has dental problems, but it won’t fix dental resorption though.

Cats have a very high pain tolerance, unfortunately. Ours had a canine just fall out during weekly teeth brushing, and we never ever knew anything was wrong.

Chives, on the other hand, mostly make the owner of the cat sick with annoyance.

Please God, I just ask that reviewer number 2 comes to their fucking senses for 17 minutes to approve my paper.

Oh, it’s actually the active ingredient. That’s kinda bad.

To elaborate and give a few exmples, LCA data is highly specific to a single production process, and might cover entirely different things.

There’s a huge difference between “one liter of paint from prepared from pigment and solvent” and “Me driving over to get a house sanded and cleaned, then repainted, per square meter of wall”. But both are LCA’s for painting, but the latter will be much higher.

It can go the other way too. There are also lots of sub-processes that have negative costs. Putting up a new streetlight has a environmental higher cost than replacing one, because replacing one gives you an old streetlight to recycle. You can’t just create a pile of “streetlight LCA data” and take the average.

They can even be very time-specific. If I’m sitting on a giant mountain of gravel, I can give you an LCA for your zen garden that’s much lower than last year when I had to import gravel from Norway.

Looking at chocolate here, they include lots of land-use-change, which is caused by cocoa farmers expanding and turning trees into cocoa farms. But that’s only because they’re expanding. The next harvest won’t have that change.

The majority of CO2 from moving food is created by you driving to the supermarket for groceries. It’s not hard to see how when you compare a 15 ton truck moving 30 tons of food, compared to a 2 ton car moving 4 kg of food. That truck can move 1000 times further than a personal car for about the same amount of CO2 per kilo of food.

This same logic means it’s more efficient to buy tomatoes from a continent away than to drive to the market to buy tomato seeds.

It’s a creative writing exercise someone is posting to Lemmy in exchange for upvotes.

Reading what he says about other cultures is very interesting specifically because of that. And on top of that, he’s extremely eloquent.

It’s a pretty rare glimpse into the mind of a man who was very educated, and wellspoken and who saw everyone who wasn’t white as truly, and regrettably, lesser. And yet despite being so horribly racist, he did feel strong obligation that these poor almost-humans needed help, in his colonizing, appropriating way.

Its fucking terrible, but there aren’t people like that anymore. There isn’t someone who will go “yeah, all of them [slurs] are dumb fucking shits, but damnit we whites owe it to help em out!”

And no, ffs, let’s not bring that back. But that doesn’t make it less fascinating.

Also, we’re very used to the most of the insulting and degrading racism of today, but Kipling had very much a condescending racism that’s pretty rare today. Something like Gunga Din is praising and elevating someone… Because his work as a water carrier is very impressive for someone so inferior.

I love what Kipling wrote, but the man was amazingly sexist and racist.

But if you force some modern sensibilities on the poem that Kipling would have gotten violent over, “If” is pretty great.

But, what could possibly go wrong by putting an LLM and a password manager in the same package? I mean, it’s like the CEO isn’t getting their bonus just because some users get their private data horrible compromised.

As long as you don’t go over the max, it works.

You’d browse through them like a rolodex. The disks can tilt forward in the box to make that easier.

But the Force is Mass times Acceleration!

When somebody publishes a bullshit paper that is eventually withdrawn, every subsequent paper citing the fraudulent work can also be withdrawn as being unreliable.

It depends on how foundational it is, of course. If you could swap it for a dozen other papers, nobody cares. If you’re continuing the work from a retracted paper, you’re fucked (but then, you probably would have noticed some errors pretty soon anyway).

I have a friend who basically ran a series of experiments based on a paper that was complete bullshit. And like any good biochemist, he figured he was screwing up, or the equipment was faulty, or the substrate was more cursed than usual. Lucky for him, after weeks of smashing into a brick wall of failure, he started asking other people, who also kept failing and then they figured it out.

It’s only when you are capable of finding the answer for yourself that you realise the AI is usually wrong.

Exactly. Explaining that LLMs don’t give the right answer, they give an answer that appears correct to the average person. Sometimes, for trivial stuff, a thing that appears correct is correct. For complex matters, you need to ask yourself “if I asked my aunt to Google this, would I use that answer for my company?”.

If the answer is yes, then by all means, use LLMs for your work.

The AI could replace their entire company, including C-level. Is that the goal?

To which the C-level, in their bloated ignorance, will answer that they can’t possibly be replaced, because their job is hard and nuanced and requires insight, unlike those coders who just type stuff all day or those engineers who just draw things and do maths more slowly than LLMs do.

It’s only a surprise to idiots.

Well, not all the time anyway. How many humans were buried with hats on?