I'm hoping to get a VR set at some point, but I've heard it's difficult to get working on Linux so I've been putting it off. Maybe once the steam frame exists. I looked at the Valve index but it currently costs $4,000 in my country which is insane lol
Zarobi
joined 2 months ago
Euro truck simulator is the closest game I've played in that genre. Sometimes I just want to do something with my hands and turn my brain off for a while, and playing a "boring" game is pretty good for that. Think of it like watching re-runs of familiar shows. Sometimes I play House Flipper as well, literally just painting walls and mowing the lawn lol
Send a physical envelope via post containing the temporary password for sign up
I disagree; your view sucks
$10 an hour still seems really good though right? I'm not sure how much Airlines pay currently for fuel though.
Only article I could find was this: https://flyinginsight.com/2026/02/14/how-much-does-it-cost-to-fuel-an-airplane/
On average, a 737 or A320 consumes between 2,500 and 3,000 litres of fuel per hour
Take a typical two-hour flight, such as Amsterdam to Barcelona. The total fuel burn would be approximately 5,500 litres. At a reference price of $0.59 per litre, that translates to around $3,200 in fuel costs.
So that's $10 an hour down from $1600 an hour? Seems decent.
I think you're mixing up who's morally at fault and who's legally responsible. They can be and often are completely separate things. You can do nothing wrong and still be legally responsible, or you can knowingly commit evil and get away with it.
That's what I'm trying to say here, that it's not really the operator's "fault" if an A.I. goes off and does a crime they didn't ask for. It's also not really the developer's "fault" if an A.I. they have no real control over malfunctions. But someone will probably end up legally responsible regardless. The question of who is a tough one since there's no obvious wrongdoer to point a finger at.
What is the statistical likelihood of an individual possessing access to a thesaurus inadvertently precipitating the activation of the artificial-intelligence revelation watermark?
It's not like it's a secret invisible Unicode character flag or something, it's just a series of word choices. To me, this seems extremely unreliable. It's only one step removed from those "unreliable A.I. detection tools" that scan for common word choices A.I. uses. You've just biased your own A.I. to use specific word choices and then told your own A.I. to check for those words. This doesn't seem special or interesting to me. There's still going to be false positives, but now with even more false confidence.
I've met some people who actually believe that the technology itself is inherently evil lol
Well, I think that someone should sit down and make some actual rules. As an example, "A.I. agents cannot have access to the public internet" is an simple one to implement, and easy to make decisions of who is at fault. I'm not claiming that's the rule we should use, but we need something at least.
Currently there is no such rule, so it's impossible to determine who is at fault, and it's basically the wild west with companies "hacking" each other as marketing stunts.
Considering LLMs still completely fail at even executing a consistent narrative D&D like roleplaying experience, which is the strongest possible use case for the technology in this area; I'm also sceptical this will ever be a good experience
Anecdotally, all our young family members don't trust A.I. at all.
Once, I asked it a question as a joke, (I think it was about "Labubu"s or something I'm out of touch about); they told me it sounds like fake news 😂. I asked the tool if we could trust it, and it said something like "no, don't trust me", which was hilarious.
I think kids these days have a good bullshit detector, by necessity.