• The one on the bottom left is amazing in that it appears to ge defying the laws of physics. The two halves do not connect, yet the bottom part still stays in place.

    That’s the kind of stupidity I expect from corporate America: invent anti-gravity, but use it solely for an aesthetic purpose on the worst product imaginable.

  • EndOfLine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    They should get right on that. Start with this design and never listen to the naysayers when they say it can’t be done!

    • baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      AI will solve global wireless charging soon™️, and thus a battery isn’t needed. also chip miniaturization, obviously. duh.

      /s

    • mamg22@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s the best part, no batteries needed, it just needs to suck away a significant portion of your brain energy, you won’t need it either way.

      *insert it’s free real estate meme here*

  • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Orson Scott Card wrote a trilogy series that had a similar concept back in the 80s and 90s. Its the trilogy that immediately follows after Ender’s Game.

    Speaker For the Dead Xenocide Children of the Mind

    I know Orson Scott Card is a bigot, so please don’t give him anymore money, but I always think of this series when it comes to personalized AI in earings.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Good one. What is the gray area? When does an enhancement or improvement become actually worse than being without? Not to give the OP subject any credit, but the ones in your link both damage and help the individual at the same time, allowing them to do things they may not have been able to do themselves. Is the cost worth it? The instinct is to say of course not, but maybe, depending on what’s gained?

      As we move closer (seemingly) to computer assistance being the norm in various ways, this is yet something else we should probably address and discuss long before it’s already around us causing issues. And I know this is a meme community, but often the best discussions come from the simplest of starts.

      • sunsofold@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I read it as less about the value of the result from some measure of success and more of a question of ‘what are you if you simply do what someone/something else tells you to do?’ If all you do is enact the orders of the earring, are you still you? Are you even human? If your brain deforms to the point it loses the ability to make decisions or enact your own will, do you even still exist, regardless of whether the rest of your body still moves?

        • Rhaedas@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          That seems to be the direction, and yet the story also says that its never wrong, nor does the person have to take that choice. Its an aid, but the problem is people turn the aid into a crutch. Which we are seeing with AI in ways, people claiming to do stuff but not really having a clue what they’re doing, nor able to fix or change it. But what if you always weighed the earring’s advice along with all the other choices and then made the choice that made sense to you? Knowing that the earring isn’t wrong in a certain context, but maybe taking other paths that are worse now will lead to better choices later.

          I know the warning is that people tend to take the easier route, and at some point it becomes an addiction to just follow the suggestion “just once more”.

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.worksOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I think the problem comes from offloading your thinking onto a machine. Machines should do stuff that’s mentally taxing because it’s tedious, not because it makes you think too hard. The earring in that parable is Cory Doctorow’s reverse centaur taken to the furthest extreme.

        • Rhaedas@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Right, so if it instead was a tool for say translation, that’s more narrow tool use. But it still stunts your ability because you’ll lean into it vs. trying to learn the words yourself. Or say an augmentation to do instant math, hard problems, but then you start using it for stuff you could have done before in your head.

          • zarkanian@sh.itjust.worksOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Right, so if it instead was a tool for say translation, that’s more narrow tool use. But it still stunts your ability because you’ll lean into it vs. trying to learn the words yourself.

            It depends upon how you use it. I use Google Translate to aid me in learning Esperanto, but I’m using it as adjunct to my dictionaries, textbooks, and other sources. It isn’t my teacher, and it isn’t my single source of truth. More often than not, it’s the last resort when everything else has failed, and I’m wary of the results it gives me. Also, crucially, I’m learning the language so I don’t have to rely upon it for translations. LLMs are tools, not teachers.

            Or say an augmentation to do instant math, hard problems, but then you start using it for stuff you could have done before in your head.

            LLMs are terrible at math. I don’t think they’ve been able to fix that? It might even be one of those things that they can’t fix, simply due to how LLMs operate. In any case, we’ve had calculators for a long time, yet children are still taught math in school because society recognizes that understanding as crucial.

            • Rhaedas@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I was more inferring a ML for math tied to your brain, not LLM.

              I’m old enough to remember when calculators were a new thing and not allowed in the math classes until you learned enough to understand if what you got from them was probably right. Again, timely with the LLMs we have now, people are just copy and paste and not actually looking at the output.

      • QueenHawlSera@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Can they arrest Elon for using CSAM to train his AI? If there was any justice he would be in front of a jury the second Grok first generated CP

        • dubs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I mean… they can, of course. “Will they?” is a different question. But I think we all know the answer to that one, unfortunately…

  • nonentity@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    LLMs are explosively imprecise, statistically luke-warm, grey goo extrusion sphincters, which is why all the logos for ‘AI’ companies are variations of arseholes.