ChatGPT is a proof of concept. If succesfull the AI wil lbe employed in many jobs.

Of course they are going to rebrand it. Eugenics as a word has so much negative baggage this may be the first time i didnt get downvoted to hell when i said its not a bad thing.

And thats why we have to push for this technology to be available to everyone, so the class divide wouldnt get so wide. The rich is going to use it whether we like it or not, the only way we can equalize the field is if we use it ourselves.

Sure, but in common parlance these models are called AI, despite not actually being AI.

But because it never reaches your eyes, the AI does not get the feedback on whether the job was good or bad.

If AI is artificially limited from considering women in comedic situations it will end up having unpredictable results when the model will have to consider women in comedic situations as part of some other task given to AI.

An example would be if you were to have AI solve crime situation, but said situation would have aspect to it that included what humans would find comedic.

Whenever it gets a task that involves information including women and jews as in potentially comical situations it will give unpredictable results as it had no training on this due to the block.

The classic "were good at this one thing so lets do everything else but what were good at"

It does because it leads to wrong lessons learned by the AI. Or rather, it learns to no lessons learned because AI cannot process this. This makes the AI end up with wrong conclusions whenever it has to analyse anything related to people groups.

No, we already answered "Should we" with "yes" long ago.

Yes. Eugenics is a good thing. It being misused in the pasts does not make it bad any more than hitler being vegan makes vegetables bad for you.

Meanwhile countries without ethic comitees cockblocking science: Look at this baby we cured from AIDS his mother contracted.

Choosing to be happy in a situation of despair is a sign of mental illness.

Artificially gimping the AI, especially when it comes to considering specific groups of people, lead to bad results for everyone.

>It's not necessary for them (Open A.I) to disclose every new step that they have taken

Then they should rename their company to Close AI.

Let me twist this a bit.

"New hospital, cool right, but when you remember that you are the one paying for other peoples poor life choices its depressing."

"New school cool right, but when you remember this results in parents driving their children across town to it polluting everyones slung in the process it's depressing"

"New houses cool right, but when you remember that they look like something soviets buit in the 60s and the city architect simply rubberstamps any project coming across his desk it's depressing"

"New festival cool right, but when you remember the noise pollution will make sure you are sleep deprived for a week it's depressing."

Unless you live in a palce like the town i live in where the local news that are portrayed as something good isnt if you actually know whats being done. Stuff like "new infrastructure". Sounds good right? except its designed to be anti-pedestrian repeating same mistakes our city architect swore not to do years ago.

Social media has made us sub-humans.

Its a combination of both. I still do mostly the same job, but i do have a better position on paper.

Nah, but my family in the currently coastal city will need to build one.

People ate more, but that wasnt the fault of the meals.

whole foods (not the brand) are availble to most working class families. they just dont choose them because, to no surprise, they dont taste good.

Processed foods are not bad. The issue is that many "fast" food is badly processed.

Have you ever boiled rice? Thats processing food.

No. Studies show that badly processed foods are bad. Merely processing it does not impact its effect on health. Do note that most thermal processing creates carcinogens, which is another can of worms people should stop fearmongering over.

Conifers also are much more useptable to pollution which is why they are rarely planted in urban enviroments to begin with. They capture the particle pollution, and then die from it.

if the oceans are warmer they evaporate more water which then results in a rain. So more rain is global warming. More rain in itself however is not an issue. Flash rains are the issue. quick and heavy rains that erode the top soil damaging the landmass everywhere.

Not everywhere. I too am in "the west" and my purchasing power increased significantly in the last 10 years.