Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)Z
Posts
2
Comments
96
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Although a second look I agree they don't look right for that. Guess I should have taken more graph theory modules.

  • Arthur C Clarke would like a word.

  • I wasn't sure if Feynman Diagrams.

  • I really want to learn this stuff. Its looks so much like magic

  • I think this inherently accepts the narrative that the work women were doing before had no or little value.

    That care and emotional labour should not fall solely on women and we should all have the opportunity to partake in meaningful work but we shouldn't accept having to accept less time for care (and leisure) on some trumped up definition of what's productive/economic or not.

  • I'll go out on a limb that Raccoons won't rummage here :)

    I agree with the sentiment but if they have a cafe selling things in disposable packaging then the best thing they can do is provide bins to deal with it. Pretending they don't generate rubbish is just a false accounting trick.

  • A strange headline when that's the minority view they report.

  • Agreed that the studios need to be held more accountable and their usage of AI is more problematic than open source last resort type work. I have noticed a degradation of quality in the last five years on mainstream sources.

    However, the existence of this last resort tool will shift the dynamics of the "market" for the work that should be being done. Even in the open source community. There used to be an active community of people giving their voluntary labour to writing subtitles for those that lacked them (they may still be active I don't know). Are they as likely to do that if they think oh well it can be automatically done now?

    The real challenge with the argument that it helps editors is the same as the challenge for Automated Driving. If something performs at 95% you actually end up deskilling and stepping down the attention focus and make it more likely to miss that 5% that requires manual intervention. I think it also has a material impact on the wellbeing of those doing the labour.

    To be clear I'm not anti this at all but think we need to think carefully about the structures and processes around it to ensure it does lead to improvement in quality not just an improvement in quantity at the cost of quality.

  • It is probably good that OS community are exploring this however I'm not sure the technology is ready (or will ever be maybe) and it potentially undermines the labour intensive activity of producing high quality subtitling for accessibility.

    I use them quite a lot and I've noticed they really struggle on key things like regional/national dialects, subject specific words and situations where context would allow improvement (e.g. a word invented solely in the universe of the media). So it's probably managing 95% accuracy which is that danger zone where its good enough that no one checks it but bad enough that it can be really confusing if you are reliant on then. If we care about accessibility we need to care about it being high quality.

  • Yes fair points. I assumed it was a balance between aerodynamics and crumple zones/legal requirements which is why they don't all look like the aptera (or Schlörwagens).

    I'm quite sure the system isn't optimising for what we want/need out of vehicles though and we could almost certainly do better.

  • They are similar as far as I understand because they all want the same outcomes of the design : better aerodynamics and effective crumple zones to faculiate higher survival of the occupants in a crash (some vehicles additionally try to limit injuries with pedestrians too but less so in US vehicles).

    I do agree that we have lost some of the majesty of older variations of designs but largely I think it'd convergent evolution. To leave that behind you'd want to have a really good reason which I don't think the cyber truck really has. Different for the sake of being different rather than innovative.

  • What I find frustrating about the current wave of "AI" is how much it obfuscates any meaningful discussion about the utility of different methods and approaches.

    Does Machine Learning or Machine Vision have a role in decarbonisation? Probably yes but it will require thought (and carbon accounting to make sure savings large enough!).

    Do LLMs or other GenAI techniques designed to pump out rehashes of existing images or text at tremendous energy cost? No.

    Are either of them "Artificial Intelligence" or are either of them likely to become "Artificial Intelligence"? No.

  • Brrrr

    Jump
  • Don't leave us hanging - what was the one book that was so bad?

  • Not sure how serious this comment is but these are anomalies against expected behaviour from models. These models include historical data with the addition of how we expect the changes we are making to impact it with the best knowledge we have of how the systems work.

    So its not saying its surprising that Australia is hot this time of year it's saying it markedly hotter than we expect or can explain using everything we understand about the climate.

  • Took me a while to dig out my copy but very much not. The next sections of the diary are:

  • It is. I liked the film but they reworked some elements of it. I don't think it does the book justice.

  • "Enjoys" is not how I would describe it.

  • This is from The Prestige by Christopher Priest in case any one wonders. It's a good book!

  • I'm pretty sure it's real. I met someone once who worked in materials research for food and they said that modelling was big there because the scope for experimentation is more limited. In materials for construction where they wanted to change a property they could play around with adding new additives and seeing what happens. For food though you can't add anything beyond a limited set of chemicals that already have approval from the various agencies* and therefore they look at trying to fine tune in other ways.

    So for chocolate, for example, they control lots of material properties by very careful control of temperature and pressure as it solidifies. This is why if chocolate melts and resolidifies you see the white bits of milk that don't remain within the materia.

    *Okay you can add a new chemical but that means a time frame of over a decade to then get approval. I think the number of chemicals that's happened to is very very small and that's partly because the innovation framework of capitalism is very short term.