Asking the Yes Machine for validation usually ends up with positive results.
Yu gi oh
Tekken
Roman History
NYC crime maps
We got a thinker over here
That's some c/iamverysmart material right here, assuming someone has made that community.
Is there still hope for this timeline?
I think a powerful enough solar storm could set things mostly on a better track.
There's some study out of MIT that isn't yet peer reviewed that says use of AI harms cognition. It might be useful to show people studies like that and hope for the best, but honestly, I'm not sure.
No, but I'm the exception!!!!! It harms cognition in others because they were already low IQ.
Want to hear my crafted theories on Yu Gi Oh decks and talk about when glaives were added to a video game?
Lmao the second anyone mentions IQ to me outside of a psychiatric evaluation I know I can tune out whatever else they have to say.
I like IQ as part of teaching the vocab words “validity” versus “reliability.” The test is “reliable” in that you’ll get the same scores consistently, but is it “valid” in that it claims what it purports to measure?
It’s also a good way to talk about the math behind standard deviation - very relatable for the “empirical rule.”
do not factor in the high scores from my tests [...] while keeping the test scores in mind
That's already one way of making the ai output more unreliable. Not that it was ever reliable to begin with of course.
Am I misunderstanding something or does this instruction contradict itself? "do not factor in" and then "keeping test scores in mind".
Yes exactly, and in my experience that's a sure-fire way of tripping up the ai.
Screenshots of people being insane on Facebook. Please censor names/pics of end users in screenshots. Please follow the rules of lemmy.world
