Feeding people, sheltering the homeless, networking, and solidifying
Seems to me that not one of those is “demolishing deathcamps”, so by your argument those are all “just festivities”, no?
The thing you’re arguing here is entirely different to your original comment that the above commenter was arguing against.
I mean the Marshall plan more or less rebuilt the entirety of Europe…
Shit
Anyway 9 is still not exactly “long”
The longest word in that sentence is 8 letters…
Ah yes, because the EU has never done anything before
Chezmoi with auto-push is the way
The hammer and sickle, no? The British communist party uses it to this day, at least
loaves = 1
if (eggs)
loaves = 12
I would absolutely put this on my fridge
Technically, Greenland is a Danish autonomous territory
none of them help an average person*
*except the trains, vaccines, 2 new types of computation, cultured meat, wireless charging, stem cell treatments, neural interfaces, gene editing**
**and whatever unknown advances are unlocked by those and the other technologies
What am I, rainman? Regardless, I’m not sure what that has to do with whether “technology has peaked”
In the last ~10 years humanity has developed:
New technologies tend to have long lulls while being developed, followed by a rapid series of developments when those technologies become viable and in turn provide the base for new technologies.
Yeah, there’s always grifters and technologies that turn out to not be useful, but there’s also always tons of people working really hard to create new advances for the benefit of mankind. Capitalism is definitely flawed (understatement) but relative to say, feudalism, continues to be a very efficient way to allocate resources when used in a well managed economy.
So, to summarise, you have no actual evidence, you’re insulting me for not coming to the same conclusion you came to just based entirely on vibes?
Given that natural language interfaces are pretty ubiquitous (you almost certainly have Gemini/Google Assistant or Siri on your phone by default), I think “it’s self-evident” is not a compelling argument here
Okay, so would you like to now elaborate on what that research was, and why that research proves that it’s so impossible for me to be correct that it’s reasonable to call me an idiot? Or is it just the case that you hate AI, and thus merely thinking it’s possible that people may use it as a browser interface means I deserve to be insulted?
What an eloquent and well researched argument you’ve put forward
I think there’s some alt-text generation for websites that don’t have proper accessibility, though not certain if it’s released yet
Not entirely clear, but my best guess is that it will basically have an MCP implementation so that the browser can be controlled directly by an LLM
I think that’s basically what e.g. the chatgpt browser is. Despite the… hostile… response on the fediverse, I suspect it will end up being the way a lot of people interact with the internet in a few years.
The implementation challenge currently is that they’re extremely vulnerable to prompt injection.
This brought out a deep rage I didn’t know I had
Nice work!