sunsofold

joined 3 days ago
[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 hours ago

Congratulations?

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 hours ago

Two immediate thoughts:

One key there is 'savvy manager.' I've met too many who would see a line item for interviews and say 'why is this so high? Don't the HR team vet these people. I'm cutting the budget for interviews. Hey, Direct Report, I just saved the company another several thousand dollars a year. Aren't I great?'

And neither way explains a reason one would do MORE interviews if candidates were paid than while they were free. The cost increase for doubling the number of interviewees while we still aren't paying them is ~$0. You could centuple the number of interviews and 100*0 is still 0. There is still no incentive to do something MORE after it has a cost. If you want to hire the right person, you'll do as many interviews as it takes, until the cost of interviews grows beyond the expected cost of hiring a suboptimal candidate. That's true now. Why would it be different then?

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 hours ago

If you are five and asking to see a gang bang with politicians' wives, I'm telling your mom.

But seriously, if you want to understand things, here's a boil down:
There are many types of "AI." The two you, as a non-researcher, are likely to come into contact with are LLMs (Large Language Models) and genAI. (generative AI)

LLMs work like autocomplete. In a similar way you can type 'C-H-O-C' into your phone and it can predict you probably want to type 'chocolate' or 'chocks' because that sequence of letters usually leads into one of those words, an LLM can take the prompt 'how to I center a div?' and predict the next piece of text will begin with 'The' because the pattern is similar to things seen on many websites that were in the data used to create the model. The system does not think or understand, just predicts the next piece of text.

The other type of AI, which you reference indirectly, is genAI. GenAI is a system that has been trained on many large data sets where there is a picture and a description of that picture so when shown a picture of a dog, it can return a probability the shown image is a dog. When the math is run backwards, it can turn the word 'dog' into a potential picture of a dog, and repeatedly tweak it to create something that more and more reads to the system as 'probably a dog.'

As to what you can do with these systems, that depends. Every implementation of the idea has different rules and limitations. Some you might be able to put that prompt into. Some sites filter your prompts. The general rule at this point though is that it's kind of pointless. You aren't likely to get anything amazing. It's all going to just be mediocre at best unless you have the resources to burn on making something bespoke, but at that point you could probably spend less money finding a bunch of look-alikes for those women and hiring them to be in a porno like people did with that Sarah Palin porno in the days before AI was talked about so much.

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 hours ago

Find where the rainbow touches the ground. Or, wait, that's leprechauns.

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Why have you made a clay bust of William Murderface?

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 7 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

It's not just for old people. Anyone old enough to have a beloved piece of media can be targeted through nostalgia. You think Disney was going for 'old people' when they made all those direct to VHS sequels? Every stand-alone sequel to any original piece of media is a gimmick to milk your nostalgia, even if the original is only from a year ago.

Nostalgia needs to be returned to its original status as a form of mental illness.

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 hours ago

Now I would like to be able to compare this source to the ones I saw years ago that said the average was 5.75 and 6.1 and compare their methodology but I don't still have those old sources.

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 hours ago

No. If something is to be upwardly fucked, let it be something that makes the landlord's life better, not parts of your own home. Busting up your own place makes your life worse short term because now your place is crappier, and makes life worse for the next tenant because the landlord isn't going to just eat the loss. They'll either take you to court for it or just charge the next person enough to cover it plus a percentage for themselves, increasing their eventual parasitic load.

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 6 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Why have you stopped taking your meds?

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 hours ago

Appa from Kim's Convenience saying 'No, you!' to everything.

'You're deflecting.'

'No! You are deflecting!'

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 hours ago

Even if you look at it through a pure numbers view, places that do this are dumb. Data centers have a figurative two people working in them. They are not getting paid enough and spending enough to cover the tax loss of the kind of cuts they are offering the company to get them.

[–] sunsofold@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 hours ago

Something about the little head weave and vacant smile lands deeply in the uncanny valley.

view more: next ›