AI creating jobs by requiring more human intervention for validation of previously reliable forms of information?

Okay cool, I’m here for it.

I already miss those halcyon days when if I saw a photo or video I could be reasonably sure whether or not it was computer generated.

Provenance is going to matter again, and chains/webs of trust ate always a heavy lift.

I think this kinda points to why AI is pretty decent for short videos, photos, and texts. It produces outputs that one applies meaning to, and humans are meaning making animals. A computer can’t overlook or rationalize a coding error the same way.

I mean, if I felt I could control the little computer in a smart fridge without expending excessive effort to do so, I might be interested in getting one myself. Absent other concerns, a tablet integrated into my fridge could be handy to monitor the appliance, make quick or even automated grocery list updates, etc. Not earth shattering, but still marginally useful.

Wait, you can’t access it via IMAP?

And just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s ethical.

My concern is that they’ll include the equipment for spying on you, and just enable it later.

I bought a Hue because it said “no online account required!” Later they changed their mind.

I want the promise plus open standards and a base of libre software. I want them to tie themselves to the mast.

…with red light cameras.

Correct. It is a different problem.

That is actually a legitimate concern. Add it to the long list of “technologies that are cool and good except when capitalism”

Civic religion, but make it gnostic.

The SA article mentions Houston, a notoriously horrible city to drive in (concentric freeway rings, I swear). It pulled data from Texas from before 2010, and I know at least some municipalities were shortening their yellows then to encourage short stopping. It also studies changes in behavior after the punishment tool has been removed, so the drivers are already operating with years of conditioning. They even referenced the study that showed that the number of people running red lights in Virginia dropped 67% after red light cameras were installed? I need to look a little bit closer at their statistical analysis to see what confidence threshold they were using to determine that the reduction in accidents that they did see was not statistically significant, but overall I’m not that impressed by one study from a borderline pop science magazine.

Meta-analysis is the way to go.

First, don’t call it anarchy. But second, the other way to stop people from running reds is more cops.

None of these are actual problems with red light cameras, and actually people run red lights all the damn time.

There are other, newer cameras like those from Flock that run and check continuously. I prefer the old-school ones you’re talking about.

🤫

Surveillance, yes. By forcing you to maintain control of a physical token they can more easily associate you with the account.

Sony so mad at Cox for not cutting off someone’s Internet for downloading they’ll take it to the SCOTUS, but they won’t even use the frankly abusive laws they already have access to to just sue the end user? What is even going on?

Artisanal idiocy.

You’re probably right. He was the lib-left’s Best Boy a few years back, was gonna solve climate change and do cool science shit and whatever, but then I forget what exactly happened but he kinda swung the other direction.

Motivation probably doesn’t matter too much. It just highlights the systemic problem of allowing one person to have that much money-power.

Conservapedia is worse, remarkably.