LilBobbyTables

joined 2 weeks ago
[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today 1 points 1 week ago

Yep definitely. I have to question the $5 of electricity claim though. $5 of electricity would barely even get an electric car that far. What size are the batteries? Where did they get this incredibly cheap power to where it can output over a megawatt of power?

[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Ok and I’m looking at that tech through a lens of what it can do and what it can become. Does it completely get rid of all of the germs and bad stuff? Does the toothpaste have the same properties as regular toothpaste? If it does all of that, why wouldn’t you be interested in exploring it?

That would be a completely revolutionary product that could change the world. It could provide better dental hygiene for the entire world.

[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

No, not at all, and I’m not sure how that could be the conclusion you came to from my post.

AI should never be touching prod systems without extreme safeguards/permissions set by the systems that they are accessing. Give it a read only db user account. Give it write access to some tables, but no delete/truncate. No AI should be able to run bash commands on production systems by itself without proper safeguards. That’s a failure of the users if it can.

Systems and software that was built by AI are fine to go into production environments after they’ve done through the regular pipeline of local testing, peer review, QA, unit tests, integration tests, test environment, stage environment, etc.

You never just give AI unfettered access to production systems to do whatever it wants, just like you don’t give a junior dev that access. People that aren’t “smart or educated enough” won’t have that access either - and again, if they do that’s a gigantic failure by the people that are.

[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

When you’re doing local stuff that can’t do any damage due to the existence of things like source control, recycle bin, backups, etc sure, hit that button and let it fly.

Anything more important though, no - and every one I’ve used specifically warns you against it and that you should check its work. Claude, codex, copilot, grok, cursor, etc all do it.

Also you can do things like allow all work in a certain folder without asking permission again, if that folder is one you have no sensitive/important data in for example. Claude code will give you this option every time it accesses a new folder in a chat for example.

[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today 40 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Bill Gates’ daughter’s company just got caught doing this exact same “cookie stuffing” thing. There is damning evidence, including internal slack chats and emails that have been confirmed, showing that they knew what they were doing. Something like 80% of all of their tens of millions of dollars in revenue was by hijacking people’s purchases with their affiliate code.

I expect nothing will happen to her, of course.

[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

Yeah unfortunately this is only viable for extremely short flights 100-200 miles as the article says. Batteries are just too heavy and planes needs too much power for anything more.

These would be the perfect private jet for the ultra rich who take a jet to work a few minutes away, or to go shopping, but for commercial flights they’re basically not an option until we have a huge breakthrough in battery tech. We need the mythical “coming next year” for the last 20 years “solid state batteries”.

[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today 3 points 1 week ago (5 children)

It has nothing to do with AI. Pornographic models for 3d printing have been everywhere in large numbers long before the current AI became a thing.

[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today 17 points 1 week ago

As someone who has been deep into 3d printing for a long time, even selling prints that I bought licenses for, there are a LOT of people who want exactly that.

[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Ok so you fundamentally don’t understand that in public places you have no expectation of privacy and can be recorded or photographed without consent in most of the world. You might not like that or agree with it, but that’s how it is.

Seems you’re the one who is out of touch.

[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today 1 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Now you’re trying to make a distinction between recording and recording exactly from your PoV? Why? Why does that make any difference?

Glasses are visible, and what I’ve been saying is that there just needs to be legislation and standards around making it obvious when smart glasses are recording.

[–] LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

Nice gate keeping attempt.

The only community I am subscribed to at the moment is this one. Maybe that’s why? Like you said, I’m just new.

I’m a tech enthusiast. I love the bleeding edge of tech. I don’t look at a new tech product through the cynical lens that you clearly do. I look at it with an open mind about what it could do and what it could become. Like I said in another comment, people had these same “creep” comments and opinions about cameras on phones, but that thankfully didn’t slow down their adoption and innovation.

Do you just accuse everyone you disagree with of being a “shill”? You have to wonder about what type of person jumps straight to that.

view more: ‹ prev next ›