Yelp is a social network that also happens to have business reviews. So I don't mean a social network, I mean a site specifically focused on reviewing books and other consumer products. I don't mean some rando opening an app and writing their opinion about the food they just ate.
It's possible to send anonymous tips to reporters. It's not hard. All he's doing with this story is farming fake internet points on Reddit. Getting something off his chest is not changing the systemic causes that made the situation he's currently in. If anything, he's actually exasperating the issue by having chosen to take this to Reddit instead of some trusted media outlet.
The real question is why have we engineered our environment so unhealthy choices are so easy to make. There are systemic issues here that go beyond individual choices. Social media is also part of the equation and we are now seeing the kind of damage it is doing to the epistemic commons. Everyone believes whatever they want to, safely cocooned in their own media echo chambers. The longer this state of affairs persists the worse things will get. Inability to deal with a pandemic is just the tip of the iceberg.
It's great that this doctor can share his experience but why is he posting this on Reddit? Why isn't this information available from trusted media sources? And for that matter, why aren't there any such trusted sources that everyone can agree is acting in their best interests and providing them with worthwhile and pertinent news?
Democracies can not survive without functional news and media sources.
> We live in a cultural climate that loves machines and where the promise of artificial general intelligence assumes, at least for some, religious proportions. The thought that we can upload ourselves onto machines intrigues many. So why not look forward to the prospect of them doing so, especially since some very smart people guarantee that machine supremacy is inevitable. Larson in THE MYTH OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE successfully unseats this inevitability narrative. After reading this book, believe if you like that the singularity is right around the corner, that humans will soon be pets of machines, that benign or malevolent machine overlords are about to become our masters. But after reading this book, know that such a belief is unsubstantiated and that neither science nor philosophy backs it up.
The best way to dispel the hype is to explain to people that computers can not do anything without algorithms/software. So if there is any intelligence anywhere in an AI system then it must have come from people because they're the ones that invent the algorithms. This confusion between algorithms and some mystical disembodied pure form of intelligence only benefits the hucksters that are selling new age promises of digital salvation.
Reviews are meaningless, they have been for a long time now. The right way to do reviews is off site because that is the only way to guarantee impartiality.
One of my reviews was removed once because it mentioned the author lacked expertise in the domain he was commenting on. It was about AI and the author was a historian. I recommended people skip the chapters about AI but apparently that was too critical.
Their pivot to Meta indicates that Zuckerberg knows Facebook is dead. The continued survival of the company now depends on whether they can successfully pivot to something else other than a social network. If they can then they might manage to survive but if not then it's pretty clear Facebook is finished even without people doing anything about it.
There aren't many (useful) posts when I search for "no such thing as artificial intelligence". The first result is an aggregation site that points to this article: https://aitopics.org/doc/news:88D0C200. [1]
I wasn't aware that booleans could be instantiated with a constructor. What would be a reason for using the constructor instead of the literals "true" and "false"?
Periodic reminder about Gell-Mann amnesia. AI systems continue to give the illusion of intelligence while simply performing basic linear algebra. It's fine to call matrix multiplication "intelligence" but it's not really close to what humans are capable of.