Instead of "surgically adjusting" logits within an existing model, couldn't you just build the slop detector into the loss function during the initial training stage?
Every thread on this I have to post the same thing, which I hope will make people inform themselves, because we need our attention to be directed at the correct people.
> The EU tries something like this every few years.
This is NOT the EU trying it (I'm not even sure you know what you mean when you say "The EU"). This is certain groups of politicians from certain EU member states raising it again and again.
Please keep yourselves informed, don't spread an incorrect message, because this is an important issue to fight and needs accurate information.
This IS eu trying it since late 2021. The original proposal was adopted by the lead european commissioner Ylva Johansson in May 2022 and the commission has been trying to find support for it in the council ever since.
2. maladministration: Decision on how the EU Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) dealt with the moves of two former staff members to positions related to combatting online child sexual abuse (case 2091/2023/AML) (https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/decision/en/200017)
Please keep yourselves informed, don't spread an incorrect message, because this is an important issue to fight and needs accurate information.
Citing articles is tricky because people have agendas. I cannot take any of them at face value because we both know that the writing will skew to push the narrative they want.
There is a long history to CSAM, long before your 2021 date. If we want to keep it fairly recent, here is a straight from the source link for you (no journalist or blogger added their skew). This is 2019 where The Council (elected ministers of member states) are deciding for push this forward. This is how the EC (commission) usually get their mandate.
Research also tells us that various NGOs and Europol have been pressing the commission to act on this (side stepping national governments), but ultimately The Commission goes through the Council to get their mandate.
And keeping it more recent, this is being pushed (again unfortunately) through elected ministers of member states onto the Commission.
I'm not saying that the commission are not involved, but your message is trying to make this complicated scenario down into "evil unelected beurocrats" coming up with schemes to spy on us. It is narrow minded and directs people the wrong way.
Just like breathing, sleeping, and eating, you will always have to oppose tyranny. People who seek control will always try to get more. As long as ordinary people sustain strong opposition in word and deed it is sustainable, just like breathing.
Yep. And that's exactly why the EU has the structure it does.
Unfortunately the only country that ever left proceeded to shoot itself in both knees, light itself on fire and jump in a pool of gasoline. For NO reason.
It's not going to get reversed once they're able to analyze all comms automatically for wrong think and stop 'extremist groups' because something 'Nazi'. The Stati letter steamers could only dream of such a system.
That's an even more complicated system. How would we catch them without the type of surveillance or anti-fencing measures that have even more downsides than the amount of theft they eliminate?
> Results show a mild to moderate tendency in Wikipedia articles to associate public figures ideologically aligned right-of-center with more negative sentiment than public figures ideologically aligned left-of-center
It could be that politicians right of center have a tendency to do things which merit negative sentiment slightly more often than politicians left of center. It begs the question to call this bias.
Seems misleading or at the very least incomplete to blame these fees on "the power of the free market" when the visa / mastercard duopoly exists due to regulations making the entry barrier to creating a new card network essentially infinite
I don't think it's due to regulations. It's just a natural monopoly due to network effects. Any new entrant has to convince hundreds of payment processors and retailers to accept their cards before anyone even has them. Regulations are a trivial barrier compared to that.
Agree. As a parent to an Asian boy, I’m thankful that steps are being taken to ensure he isn’t discriminated against for school admissions and job applications.
That’s not how DEI programs operated at places I’ve worked. They were more about expanding candidate searches to look for high quality people at other places than we’d been looking, reducing alcohol at company events etc
This is a minor detail but reducing or removing alcohol all together (my company) from social events for inclusion reasons is excluding people who like consuming alcohol at social events. We somehow pivoted to embracing restrictions in order to accommodate small groups of people, instead of offering alternatives (e.g. vegan options). This will always irritate other groups of people and is not a sustainable way to improve inclusion.
> reducing or removing alcohol all together (my company) from social events for inclusion reasons is excluding people who like consuming alcohol at social events
Reducing or removing alcohol at social events is not done for "inclusion reasons" but for straightforward legal liability reasons: a drunk employee often has poor impulse control and may do or say shitty things that they wouldn't if they were sober, and with some probability this results in lawsuits against the company. No drunk people at social events -> fewer lawsuits.
Sure and one answer to that was simply to ensure soft beverage availability in addition to alcohol. Which was an initiative borne from a DEI program. We’re debating specifics of DEI-relevant initiatives. What I’m saying is these discussions only happen when there is space for DEI consideration
I am not nitpicking and in general am in support of offering more diverse options. However, in my experience I can't remember a single event where soft drinks where not offered in additional to alcohol: pre DEI or during the DEI era.
As a vegetarian, I really struggled finding good non-meat options though.
It is pretty cute. People want desperately to conform, and they know the non-conformists are cool. So they do the logical thing and conform with the non-conformists.
Heart in the right spot. Execution has room to improve.
Nowhere in time has freedom of speech been enshrined and creation been easier. But we just can't seem to take advantage of all the freedom and tools that we have at our disposal.
It isn't sad at all. Freedom for most people is freedom to conform to the ways of someone they respect as opposed to cronies of some government official. And more philosophically freedom is to give the people worthy of imitation as much room to be great as possible so that people who follow them get the best version to copy.
Humans (with rare exceptions) are happiest when operating in groups.
Someone imitating someone else is generally considered and act of something like respect and flattery. They're doing it because they sincerely believe that the target of imitation is doing something right. It is a friendly and supportive act.
I'm not convinced. In particular I think sincerity or any sort of honest judgment is missing when talking about [non-]conformity rather than the merits of individual choices.
