AbstractEngima
AbstractEngima t1_j58efxl wrote
Reply to comment by Onlymediumsteak in Rio Tinto to invest $3 billion in solar energy for mining in Australia by Surur
I think one thing about this, if Australia decides to invest heavily into making itself a power superpower.
We'll most likely to see a huge revolution when it comes to infrastructure and habitability of the continent overall. Possibly more than likely to push the country into a actual superpower status.
Considering the fact that the whole country is just mostly wilderness, with fair amount of country-sized farms across the land. But since everything is so far apart, we'll likely to see some new development of existing settlements situated in hot arid outback, turning into bigger towns or cities to supply the demand that the solar farms require for their maintenance. And we could easily grow things in the outback with enclosed farming, allowing for plants to be grown in climate controlled rooms in often considered impossible, outback with the advent of limitless clean energy.
It'd probably make sense too considering the fact that Middle East is already crumbling, due to the dominant alt-right movements destroying the countries inside out despite the facade that they put up.
AbstractEngima t1_j579yk3 wrote
It seems like 2030's will be quite different decade compared to 00's/20's, if we have to assume that "singularity" is reached around 2028-2030.
But I'm betting that 2030's will be more of a transitional decade as humanity attempts to integrate the quick advancements of "singularity" into functions of society. How long it'll take, remains a question to be seen.
Then by 2040's, we'll be more than likely to see it as a completely different decade from 00's/20's, maybe unrecognizable at best.
AbstractEngima t1_j1o2mg4 wrote
Reply to comment by GravySquad in Is AI like ChatGPT censored? by joyloveroot
That’s just basically information that’s pretty much what you can find on Wikipedia which ironically enough has far more detailed information on the processes of the bomb.
My point still stands.
AbstractEngima t1_j1nua4c wrote
Reply to Is AI like ChatGPT censored? by joyloveroot
Even if you asked a non-censored AI. It still wouldn't provide the answers that you need, because they fundamentally lack the context of your own query and the parties involved.
Human related crimes still require the context/character of a human that is only observable to a human.
Building a nuclear bomb wouldn't be useful since most AIs out there are likely not advanced enough to create elaborate complex schematics. And would be too expensive to obtain the materials to create a decent explosion.
AbstractEngima t1_jac06su wrote
Reply to Students can quote ChatGPT in essays as long as they do not pass the work off as their own, international qualification body says by Parking_Attitude_519
How is this even possible? Anyone with a brain knows that ChatGPT is nothing more than a unreliable narrator that pulls random bits of information and then puts into inaccurate mashed up information.
It's already basically following the same process as any other AI does, which is taking little bits of existing information and puts it together based on patterns, rather than actual understanding of the source material.