morrowind

joined 4 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 9 points 9 months ago

That's a terrible metric. By this providers that maximize hardware (and energy) use by having a queue of requests would be seen as having more energy use.

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

It's become weirdly normal among some people I know to give it a name, anthropomorphize it, even when just using it for standard tasks.

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago

Sure, but it's still symbolically very important

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

The reason you haven't heard of it is it used to be a unknown pixel editor and then then dev went on crack and decided to turn it into a "universal 2d graphics editor"

And well ... It worked so I'm not criticizing.

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Supporting apps out of sheer spite for gimp is certainly one business model

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

Graphite is also super interesting, but every time I've used the raster (brush) tool, it's been unusably laggy. Idk if that's the web stack or something else, but if they can improve it, I'd def want to try again

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

Oh sick I was looking for something like this. Hopefully can replace wisprflow

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

Perhaps, but that's still sprawl. California is really not-dense. There's a lot we can improve before having to shift to the farmlands. And the most in demand places are often the worst.

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 7 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Because nobody wants to live there.

You may as well say: why not move all these people to Nevada and live in all the nice open land there?

The housing crises has never been about total quantity of housing, it's about housing in the right places.

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

React native isn't the same as native

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 6 points 10 months ago

If prefer if it was a live stream of somewhere nearby. Maybe not as pretty but it's closer to actually seeing outdoors

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/30013197

Significance

As AI tools become increasingly prevalent in workplaces, understanding the social dynamics of AI adoption is crucial. Through four experiments with over 4,400 participants, we reveal a social penalty for AI use: Individuals who use AI tools face negative judgments about their competence and motivation from others. These judgments manifest as both anticipated and actual social penalties, creating a paradox where productivity-enhancing AI tools can simultaneously improve performance and damage one’s professional reputation. Our findings identify a potential barrier to AI adoption and highlight how social perceptions may reduce the acceptance of helpful technologies in the workplace.

Abstract

Despite the rapid proliferation of AI tools, we know little about how people who use them are perceived by others. Drawing on theories of attribution and impression management, we propose that people believe they will be evaluated negatively by others for using AI tools and that this belief is justified. We examine these predictions in four preregistered experiments (N = 4,439) and find that people who use AI at work anticipate and receive negative evaluations regarding their competence and motivation. Further, we find evidence that these social evaluations affect assessments of job candidates. Our findings reveal a dilemma for people considering adopting AI tools: Although AI can enhance productivity, its use carries social costs.

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/30013147

Significance

As AI tools become increasingly prevalent in workplaces, understanding the social dynamics of AI adoption is crucial. Through four experiments with over 4,400 participants, we reveal a social penalty for AI use: Individuals who use AI tools face negative judgments about their competence and motivation from others. These judgments manifest as both anticipated and actual social penalties, creating a paradox where productivity-enhancing AI tools can simultaneously improve performance and damage one’s professional reputation. Our findings identify a potential barrier to AI adoption and highlight how social perceptions may reduce the acceptance of helpful technologies in the workplace.

Abstract

Despite the rapid proliferation of AI tools, we know little about how people who use them are perceived by others. Drawing on theories of attribution and impression management, we propose that people believe they will be evaluated negatively by others for using AI tools and that this belief is justified. We examine these predictions in four preregistered experiments (N = 4,439) and find that people who use AI at work anticipate and receive negative evaluations regarding their competence and motivation. Further, we find evidence that these social evaluations affect assessments of job candidates. Our findings reveal a dilemma for people considering adopting AI tools: Although AI can enhance productivity, its use carries social costs.

 

Significance

As AI tools become increasingly prevalent in workplaces, understanding the social dynamics of AI adoption is crucial. Through four experiments with over 4,400 participants, we reveal a social penalty for AI use: Individuals who use AI tools face negative judgments about their competence and motivation from others. These judgments manifest as both anticipated and actual social penalties, creating a paradox where productivity-enhancing AI tools can simultaneously improve performance and damage one’s professional reputation. Our findings identify a potential barrier to AI adoption and highlight how social perceptions may reduce the acceptance of helpful technologies in the workplace.

Abstract

Despite the rapid proliferation of AI tools, we know little about how people who use them are perceived by others. Drawing on theories of attribution and impression management, we propose that people believe they will be evaluated negatively by others for using AI tools and that this belief is justified. We examine these predictions in four preregistered experiments (N = 4,439) and find that people who use AI at work anticipate and receive negative evaluations regarding their competence and motivation. Further, we find evidence that these social evaluations affect assessments of job candidates. Our findings reveal a dilemma for people considering adopting AI tools: Although AI can enhance productivity, its use carries social costs.

 

Was working fine this morning for me. No updates.

But now it keeps crashing and my phone shows popups saying "something went wrong with summit". Clearing the cache and force killing the app didn't help

 

discord is a black hole for information

Traditional reasoning says you should prefer open forums like lemmy that are available and searchable to the open web. After all, you're posting to help people, and that helps people the most. The platform (like reddit) may profit off of it, but that's fine, they're providing the platform for you to post. Fair deal.

Plus people coming for high quality information helps the community and topic back. You attract other high quality contributors, the more people use/partake in the topic you are discussing, the platform often improves with the revenue etc. It's not perfect, but it worked

AI scrapers break all that. The company profiting is the AI company, and they give nothing back. They model just holds all the information in its weights. It doesn't drive people to the source. Even the platform doesn't benefit from bot scraping. The addition of high quality data may improve the model on that topic and thus push people to engage in said topic more, but not much, because of how AI's are trained, while you need some high quality data, a lot more important, especially for lesser known topics, is amount of data.

So as more of the world moves to AI models, I don't really feel like posting on public forums as much, helping the AI companies get richer, even if I do benefit from AI myself.

view more: next ›