Well auto fellating is the trademark tone of LLM output, which the email probably is.

Sadly I can’t tell if this is a joke or not because I have met so many people who seriously believe things like this work. They are the ones who eventually get the most pissed when LLM messes up on them because they got the LLM to “promise” not to do the specific thing it ends up doing.

They generally evolve their superstitious ritual to something else that will eventually fail, like changing the wording, or making the LLM specifically include a phrase indicating a promise of quality. They also believe when the LLM “apologizes” and think that indicated self reflection and learning. Very few are prepared to accept that the LLM can go off the rails at unpredictable times and unpredictable circumstances, and their utility has to be monitored like a hawk unless the outcome really doesn’t matter.

Well strictly speaking the full name field is always there, but a lot of people have the full name “”.

But less pedantic, perhaps require was the writing word, but same principle, put whatever you want in dob field, default to 1970 or something.

Yes, the key thing is it might have extracted useful info from otherwise confusing data, it might have mixed up info from the data incorrectly or it might have just made it up.

So it can be useful, if you can then validate the info provided in more traditional means, but it’s dubious as a first pass, and sometimes surprisingly bad when it’s a scenario you thought it would work well at.

Giving us the ow for now, later it’s going to give us the d.

For solutions that back on actually “verifying” the age by requiring credit card or government ID, those suck.

As described, this is an administrator self describing the age, which doesn’t mean much to anyone except kids of people who apply parental controls to systems their kids have access to.

Accounts already require your “full name” but we don’t consider that “full name verification”.

This proposal seems to be in the spirit of least intrusive means to let parents opt into this stuff if they want, with no ties to identity compromising third party/state “verification”.

Question is whether this sort of solution that at least gives parents some chance will satisfy the lawmakers long term. For the wave of laws now, it seems to suffice to self attest age.

Which is one of the reasons why Discovery and Picard at least are problematic (I haven’t seen Academy).

As you say, a lot of the old stories aren’t really that good. What happens when they had a bad story, or maybe less ‘bad’ and just didn’t engage with you? New one next week.

With Discovery and Picard? Well the whole season is the story, so if it doesn’t engage with you, you are pretty much out for the season.

Personally, I never felt there was really enough narrative “meat” in their stories to warrant a season long arc, and so it felt a bit stretched for time for the perceived “a story needs to fill a binge” market.

Strange New Worlds primary win was returning to episodic, to give a story a chance to shine or fail in a digestable amount of time and move on. Was at its weakest when Season 3 kind of devolved to a weird arc.

Pretty much. And maybe in the off-screen bragging about it, at least say first main character or first crew member (someone argued about Dax, but I’d say that character was gendered, just fluid over the long term), not ‘first character ever’, since you had a number of instances, and pretty much dead-on a whole species dedicated to exploring gendered versus non-binary in TNG. That’s one habit of Discovery was leaving people wondering if they even watched the shows that preceeded them…

There should have been no good reason for Adira to only tell Gray despite their clear desire to be recognized as non-binary.

Or, alternatively, they could have established that 32nd century Earth cut off from the federation had backslid to MAGA-sensibilities to explain why far future human feels the need to tiptoe around their identity until they come to terms with the culture of the federation that might have been lost to Earth.

I quoted the show. Season 3, episode 8. After several episodes of going by “she” did Adira actually say anything, after spending their entire life only telling Gray.

Why else would they withhold this their whole life except for anxiety. Is not like they had an awakening, they said they never felt that way and had already confided in the person they were closest to.

They made it very clear that asserting a non binary identity was just uncomfortable enough in society in the 32nd century that Adira felt a need to keep it to themselves.

Ugh, fine.

“Adira, who joined us from Earth, may be able to guide sto Federation headquarters one she regains her own memoris”

“Is there any way the symbiont was joined with Adira against her will?”

Basically, Adira spends episodes 3 through 8 rolling with feminine pronouns, keeping their non-binary nature a secret.

Adira doesn’t come out until Episode 8: ADIRA: Um, “they.” Not… not “she.” I’ve never felt like a “she” or or a “her,” so… I would prefer “they” or “them” from now on.

STAMETS: Okay.

ADIRA: Um, and I’ve never told anyone but Gray.

Adira kept their non-binary identity secret and took them 5 episodes to work up the nerve to declare to the first person other than Gray. I think the traditional trek move would have been from episode 3, right out the gate, first reference to this new character would use non-gendered pronouns because, well, why would they feel they need to keep it a secret?

Reminds me of a time when my nephew was playing vintage Super Mario Kart and started trash talking me about how long they had been playing and that I didn’t stand a chance.

“I was playing this since before you were born kid”

I’d have to rewatch, but I recall as they picked Adira up from 32nd century Earth, despite being a fully grown up person, went by feminine pronouns. Adira had to work up to come out, rather than being out from the onset.

I recall because I was very confused on Adira’s introduction because they kept yelling from the rooftops about how progressive they were by having a non-binary character, but Adira and everyone around Adira kept using feminine terms. I distinctly recall a ‘coming out’ moment which seemed to be played with trepidation.

The fairest thing I could say is that 32nd century earth was no longer “federation” and so maybe they had a big old conservative backslide and so Adira’s plight was due to the gloomy setting of isolated Earth with the loss of FTL travel.

nVidia had announced that instead of 100 billion for nothing to OpenAI that they were doing 30 billion for stake, and said they were probably not going to keep giving these ‘halo’ AI companies money after this.

I also saw a report that banks were starting to get a bit more stingy with money to the same companies.

I think that while there’s still plenty of money coming in still, it does seem like the ‘take our unlimited cash just because you have AI in your name’ phase is wearing out and they actually have to try to convince people now.

Which is a pretty big problem for them, as despite their brand recognition they aren’t really seen as the ‘leader’ in the AI space on any particular front.

Absolute gigafrood energy.

https://www.startrek.com/news/star-trek-discovery-introduces-first-trangender-and-non-binary-characters

Is where they officially declared that Trek was doing a non-binary character for the first time.

I find it interesting that, as you point out, his comment makes zero sense but still gets upvotes, and then as he clarifies he’s saying it’s racist against chatbots, then people are unambiguously “oh hell no”

Some people upvote at a baseless accusation of racism without actually actually seeing racism or getting clarification that they may have missed… That’s a bit sad…

Actually, as I recall the entire society was ‘non-binary’ and that specific alien wanted to come out as female. And of course Riker banging was a green light after she declared herself female. Probably not the best choice to have Riker banging her as part of the narrative, but yeah, that was famously an example of them trying to address a point by inverting real-world, the ‘norm’ is non-binary and the ‘unusual’ one is gendered and the Federation serves as the model of ‘we respect your people either way, you should too’.

Well, it looks like they state three options:

• Passkeys. This won’t work over a medium term, period. It’s tantamount to saying that SSH keys prove someone is human. If there’s enough interest, they’ll just make a software passkey solution that can work. Passkey being “human interactive” is purely a client-side construct.

• Biometric services. Strictly speaking, not an ID but it’s not hard to imagine leveraging capturing biometrics to an ID like scenario.

• Government IDs. Well that’s self explanatory.

They do state distancing themselves from the ID by trusting a third party service, but 3rd party ID service is still a thing.

Of course, this seems to be only after someone accuses you of being a bot and Reddit bothering to pay attention. Which may be almost no one.

Sounds like a statement to say they have a hard-on-bots policy, but in practice it seems they won’t care unless there’s significant outcry against a particular account.

LLMs are not people, they do not possess will, they do not possess sapience. Not wanting to deal with LLM output is in no way like excluding a group of people based on arbitrary characteristics.