Recent comments in /f/Futurology

FuturologyBot t1_j9ofoew wrote

Reply to The American climate migration has already begun | Jake Bittle by Gari_305

The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:

From the Article

>We as Americans don’t often hear about this chaotic process of displacement and relocation, but the scale of movement is already overwhelming: more than 3 million Americans lost their homes to climate disasters last year, and a substantial number of those will never make it back to their original properties. Over the coming decades, the total number of displaced will swell by millions and tens of millions, forcing Americans from the most vulnerable parts of the country into an unpredictable, quasi-permanent exile from the places they know and love.
>
>This migration won’t be a linear movement from point A to point B, and neither will it be a slow march away from the coastlines and the hottest places. Rather, the most vulnerable parts of the United States will enter a chaotic churn of instability as some people leave, others move around within the same town or city, and still others arrive only to leave again. In parts of California that are ravaged by wildfire, disaster victims will vie against millions of other state residents for apartments in the state’s turbulent housing market. In cities like Miami and Norfolk, where sea levels are rising, homeowners may watch their homes lose value as the market shies away from flood-prone areas. The effects will be different in every place, but almost everywhere the result will be the same: safe shelter will get scarcer and more expensive, loosening people’s grip on the stability that comes with a permanent home.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/119wid5/the_american_climate_migration_has_already_begun/j9ocpb2/

1

Youvebeeneloned t1_j9ofit3 wrote

Reply to comment by Real-Problem6805 in Google case at Supreme Court risks upending the internet as we know it by dustofoblivion123

Nope. It’s not.

https://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/new-originalism-a-constitutional-scam

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/originalism-run-amok-supreme-court

https://www.salon.com/2022/06/03/originalism-and-other-nonsense-how-the-right-wing-justices-rationalize-mass/

Not that you would read any of that… or can read past a 3rd grade level.

0

Mikanea t1_j9oexdb wrote

Reply to comment by golighter144 in Google case at Supreme Court risks upending the internet as we know it by dustofoblivion123

Don't think about it as likes or dislikes. Think of it like engagement or not engagement. Engagement drives ad revenue whether or not it's positive. If you comment to say how terrible a video is you're more likely to have spent time on the page and watched or seen an ad somewhere. If you dislike a video it means you're spending a little more time on the page and might see an ad. Plus your negative engagement, even clicking dislike, might lead other people to positively engage and thereby watch an ad.

Your best bet is to leave the page, scroll to the next short as quickly as possible, or leave YouTube entirely. This tells the algorithm that you're not engaging and won't be seeing ads at all. It's most effective to leave a video within the first 30 seconds and interact with as few things in the page as possible.

4

Mikanea t1_j9odm2s wrote

Reply to comment by override367 in Google case at Supreme Court risks upending the internet as we know it by dustofoblivion123

It's not exactly like the bookstore example because you don't independently browse through Google/YouTube like you do a book store. It's more like if you join a membership to a bookstore where they offer you a reading list every week. If that reading list has racist, sexist, or otherwise inappropriate recommendations should the bookstore be responsible? When a company creates a curated list of content should they be responsible for the contents of the list?

I don't think there is a simple yes or no answer for this. Like all things, life resists simplicity. This is a complicated issue with complicated answers.

1

OrokaSempai t1_j9od3ub wrote

Reply to comment by Gloriathewitch in Google announces major breakthrough that represents ‘significant shift’ in quantum computers by Ezekiel_W

Pretty sure I read an article recently that explained quantum entanglement and it boiled down to math works different on the quantum scale, and in quantum math if you know 1 of 4 properties of a pair of entangled quantum particles, you can reason out an answer the same way we can figure out a property by knowing 3 of 4 properties. It's like trying to visualize infinity or a 4D object, our brains are not wired to conceive quantum math. It doesn't make sense because to us because it doesn't make sense in our corner of space time.

10

Gari_305 OP t1_j9ocpb2 wrote

Reply to The American climate migration has already begun | Jake Bittle by Gari_305

From the Article

>We as Americans don’t often hear about this chaotic process of displacement and relocation, but the scale of movement is already overwhelming: more than 3 million Americans lost their homes to climate disasters last year, and a substantial number of those will never make it back to their original properties. Over the coming decades, the total number of displaced will swell by millions and tens of millions, forcing Americans from the most vulnerable parts of the country into an unpredictable, quasi-permanent exile from the places they know and love.
>
>This migration won’t be a linear movement from point A to point B, and neither will it be a slow march away from the coastlines and the hottest places. Rather, the most vulnerable parts of the United States will enter a chaotic churn of instability as some people leave, others move around within the same town or city, and still others arrive only to leave again. In parts of California that are ravaged by wildfire, disaster victims will vie against millions of other state residents for apartments in the state’s turbulent housing market. In cities like Miami and Norfolk, where sea levels are rising, homeowners may watch their homes lose value as the market shies away from flood-prone areas. The effects will be different in every place, but almost everywhere the result will be the same: safe shelter will get scarcer and more expensive, loosening people’s grip on the stability that comes with a permanent home.

13

Peace-Bone t1_j9ocbps wrote

Reply to Question for any AI enthusiasts about an obvious (?) solution to a difficult LLM problem in society by LettucePrime

Mostly thinking out loud here.

Education is already fundamentally busted on like 50 levels. Increased anti-cheating tech is so far from the original point of learning that it's not about learning anymore. Grading itself is already a necessary evil at best. And cheating being bad is a conclusion from that.

Okay, education, ideally, is for learning. In practice it has a double purpose of also being for certification. Which is to say, the examination and projects you're supposed to not cheat on are the point. This isn't really a good thing, but it may be a necessary one. Still, a lot of prestigious and/or exclusionary institutions are overwhelmingly about certification and not learning which clearly isn't.

More certification and stricter certification do not ensure more learning. In fact, they're often the opposite. In my own experience as a college student, I've had plenty of classes I cheated with super hard and ones I did honestly, and I've seen no correlation between classes I cheat on and classes where I don't learn much. I've had classes I did honestly, were challenging, got a great grade, and learned shit-all. I've also had classes I cheated on every single thing and learned a lot doing it.

In my experience, too, ChatGPT has been like a total godsend for learning. I ask questions to the professor, which needs to be done during the limited window of office hours, and they tell me to 'look over my notes and figure it out' cause they always do and they never help. I ask ChatGPT and they explain exactly what I want forever and I can ask about anything and I can do it at 2AM.

1

Stealthy_Snow_Elf t1_j9obhbd wrote

Reply to Question for any AI enthusiasts about an obvious (?) solution to a difficult LLM problem in society by LettucePrime

Ultimately you can work around any detector by just having an AI learn solely of the cheater’s work. They’ll pick up on your mannerisms, which steps you skip, which route you’re more likely to take (convert to other units or just take it on as is), and what not.

In the end, there will be no way to detect AI’s work from humans. You could literally make the AI be wrong, just enough times not to trip the system but still get an A.

All this does is illustrate how stupid homework is and how important in class learning and work is.

Traditional education will always fail in a world with AI because traditional education barely works today. To put it more accurately, it barely works at the expense of the students who push themselves to work in an idiotic system.

3