Shit like that can’t be planned. It either catches on or it doesn’t.

Why do you want to make it cooler? Why polish this turd?

You mean illegally?

You’re heavily dealing in stereotypes. I would like to throw in there are plenty of Caucasian guys who can’t grow a full beard. And there are those in Asia who can grow a thick one as well. The distribution is subject to the generic lottery and the individual’s production of testosterone.

I have a strong suspicion that language prescribed by an Iranian official will have no bearing on what people call that region in English.

“Middle East” is a reference point from the British Isles where there is a more significant chunk of geography directly east of it. When you move into Central Europe, the ME region is called “near East” when translated literally. Because we are already a bit further east and the reference points change. There isn’t an English-language equivalent in the West because there’s mostly water.

Having exported this language to beyond mostly water to the new world, the designation stuck although it makes no sense from a North American perspective. If we all spoke a truly international version of Esperanto, things might be different. But that’s not how it worked out.

I don’t think ME as a term has acquired the same problematic stench as “orient” and variants thereof in English. Cardinal directions are quite resistant to that. The Confederate States of America haven’t ruined “South” as a term. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea hasn’t made “North” go out of style.

Startpage is owned by an American advertising company.

Eff me, really? Can you back this up? I only see a company in The Netherlands.

Google in particular getting worse to get you to click through more results pages or to run more queries so they can sell more ads on each of those is well attested. I used Bing for a while and didn’t think it was better or worse than newly bad Google. So now I use an equally shitty non-US search engine (start page) and just give up sooner.

In their defence, I think the exponentially increasing content of the internet, and the not insignificant portion that just sits there dead or unmaintained, plus the bits and bytes that just disappear as subscriptions or support run out are difficult problems. It’s getting ever harder to write an algorithm to sort through that as well. That plus greed equals shit.

Pre-Google we had very shitty search results. Than Google became the Kleenex, the word everybody used. Then Google got worse. While my faith in “American Intelligence” is somewhat limited, I think we will get back to better results soon. What Google had to do (build big server farms to look at all of the internet to index it) may become trivially easy for a sufficiently good LLM eventually. Although we’re not there yet. Given that it’s not just Microsoft or Google fighting in that market for dominance, I live in hope that competition from OpenAI etc. lights a fire under their arses.

Why aren’t they automatically looking for business links between Slovenian domain vendors and the First Family? Melania is Slovenian after all and it would be such a misstep if not even her extended family got to profit from this one.

Not much. You nurse it for a while. And most of the time, our human instinct for adapting to a changing condition kicks in. There is truth to the adage that time heals all wounds. I would add it may not heal it entirely but sufficiently.

A broken heart is like that. After a while you get used to it. And you’ll probably move on without realising it. And until you get there, distract yourself. Only hardcore introverts benefit from being alone.

So much for the platitudes. Every case is different. You may realise in time that extra steps are necessary. Like a physical move or a change in profession, etc.

That depends. Is the puzzle alive and capable of reasonable thought?

I don’t buy into “wood” obviously meaning “sandalwood.” If you have lived with carpenters, they smell like fresh timber and sweat. So if that wasn’t an option, I don’t think the contestant was specific enough.

The problems with describing this like one parabola are two-fold for me. If we look at the long arm of history, we as a species have been far less interconnected so knowledge wasn’t shared to the same extent it often is today. One of the reasons why a hypothetical Covid-819 would’ve killed more people. At the same time, various regions have gone through their own periods of trouble, dark ages, decays of empires, and religious doom. You’d have to interpolate quite heavily in the bottom part of the parabola to get started. Bronze tools could take a century to spread. Strictly speaking, Gutenberg didn’t invent book printing; China beat him to it. But the repercussions of his movable type were arguably far more reaching. Or more recently, the industrial revolution started around 1750 but didn’t affect a majority on this planet until about 50 years later. There were uncontacted people it never reached that were washed away by the 2006 tsunami. Where to plot these things on an overarching exponential graph become choices. And thus a statistic you’re forging yourself.

And then exponential means at some point we’re going to reach a point where we near constantly innovate stuff. You’d have to do the work of two scientific Nobel prizes before you had your first piss in the morning just to keep up with the pace. This pace of development isn’t sustainable. There has to be an out.

That’s why I would favour a model based on quantum leaps that show localised growth in hockey stick curves. Change today may seem fundamental and omnipresent. But 🫲 six seven 🫱 probably never reached North Korea.

Can you back up the claim of exponential change? For my money we get occasional quantum leaps that end in hockey stick curves.

Technology isn’t everything.

Does your research consider recency bias as well? More or less every generation looks at the world changing in front of them. And every generation considers this the most dramatic change ever. I remember the fall of the USSR and we all thought this is the most significant change in history - it was not. The internet and social media was the next big transformation and the sky was falling - we’re still here. All things considered, the generation in the right age bracket for military service in the late 1930s probably has a better claim on the most dramatic change happening in front of them. So I’m just wondering if you consider these biases?

The people in the nebulously defined West didn’t get into Asian comics first and then gravitated towards the Japanese offerings. Japanese manga companies saw a market for expansion and took advantage of it. Manga is Japanese in the minds of consumers. Most people probably aren’t aware of the Chinese or Korean varieties. Interest in the language came after.

Japanese may be easier to pronounce for us atonal alphabetters. I would say Chinese beats Japanese by having simpler grammar. None of these linguistic reasons matter though. There are plenty of people who learn mandarin today but they didn’t get into it through comics. Most Japanese learners don’t do it for business reasons. The stereotypes are different.

Just an idea: have a look in ask Lemmy or no stupid questions for posts of people who have asked similar questions in the last 12 months or so. How to bring about change or how to start a revolution has been asked. In those posts you’ll at least find another user who is thinking along your lines. There may be more in the comments. Reach out to them.

I think there are two trends. 1) in the early 90s people still got their porn fix from magazine stashes hidden in the woods. Or so the legend goes. So a sex scene or just some boobs were a welcomed element in a movie. In the 70s it was quite common to have absolutely gratuitous female nudity in movies that didn’t need it. Fast forward to the new millennium and you can get any porn you like on your phone in 15 seconds. People don’t go mad if there isn’t a sex scene in it any more. Sensibilities have changed; also in regards to what actors -however well paid- have to go through. Also, US movies have always been more tolerant of violence than sex.

2. Movie financing has shifted more to China and they are even more prudish than the Americans as far as movie censorship is concerned. If you want your movie to get a license to play over there, don’t make the Chinese the bad guys, don’t kill any Chinese people in the movie, and switch to footage of a train going into a tunnel when it gets hot and steamy.

I wonder if the more modern mobile network protocols require slightly more power than the 2-3G of old. It’s probably a rounding error; it would run forever™ minus an hour or so.

They give pronunciation guides. Or they’re effing around. It’s the internet.

What have rogue models effed with so far? A government website in Australia, derelict chat forums, and another AI company? I’m willing to believe that two things are happening at the same time. That sandboxing these agents will improve with these so-called breaches. And that companies like Amazon or Cloudflare are improving their security continuously with threat models. And if they don’t have rogue agents on their radar, that stack deserves to fall.

I wouldn’t lay blame here mostly at Google’s feet. They AI-err on the side of caution. I don’t know if Google finds itself as defendants in a court room right now where the influence of an LLM lead to killing or suicide. This sort of caution is the result of various user psychoses that we have learned exist in the world. Teenagers or other easily susceptible folks thinking they are Jesus, talking to god or aliens, etc. I would go so far as to say well done in a better safe than sorry kind of way in this case.

What we learn here is that the model doing search and the algorithm operate seemingly independently. And that the so-called AI results aren’t great. Water is wet, more at eleven.

Google had good search results from the late 90s to about the early 2010s. Nothing else about that company was not weird at any time. With glassholes jumping out of airplanes or them buying up almost the entire online ad market and then abusing their market position. What they are doing with Android has me this close to switching to an iPhone. And YouTube comes with its own Pandora’s box of challenges. They famously edited the “don’t be evil” stuff out of their mission statement. There are bigger Google fish to fry than this “AI summary.”