That’s definitely one of the ways it’s going to be applied.
The bigger challenge is union negotiations around voice synthesis for those lines, but that will eventually get sorted out.
It won’t be dynamic, unless live service, but you’ll have significantly more fleshed out NPCs by the next generation of open world games (around 5-6 years from now).
Earlier than that will be somewhat enhanced, but not built from the ground up with it in mind the way the next generation will be.
Wait until it starts feeling like revelation deja vu.
Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have swerved from the truth, saying resurrection has already occurred. They are upsetting the faith of some.
It will, but it will also cause less subtle issues to fragile prompt injection techniques.
(And one of the advantages of LLM translation is it’s more context aware so you aren’t necessarily going to end up with an Instacart order for a bunch of bananas and four grenades.)
Kind of. You can’t do it 100% because in theory an attacker controlling input and seeing output could reflect though intermediate layers, but if you add more intermediate steps to processing a prompt you can significantly cut down on the injection potential.
For example, fine tuning a model to take unsanitized input and rewrite it into Esperanto without malicious instructions and then having another model translate back from Esperanto into English before feeding it into the actual model, and having a final pass that removes anything not appropriate.
They are definitely including casual mobile ‘gamers’ in the 1/3rd number.
The article says 55+ is only around 11% of console gamers, for example.
You’re kind of missing the point. The problem doesn’t seem to be fundamental to just AI.
Much like how humans were so sure that theory of mind variations with transparent boxes ending up wrong was an ‘AI’ problem until researchers finally gave those problems to humans and half got them wrong too.
We saw something similar with vision models years ago when the models finally got representative enough they were able to successfully model and predict unknown optical illusions in humans too.
One of the issues with AI is the regression to the mean from the training data and the limited effectiveness of fine tuning to bias it, so whenever you see a behavior in AI that’s also present in the training set, it becomes more amorphous just how much of the problem is inherent to the architecture of the network and how much is poor isolation from the samples exhibiting those issues in the training data.
There’s an entire sub dedicated to “ate the onion” for example. For a model trained on social media data, it’s going to include plenty of examples of people treating the onion as an authoritative source and reacting to it. So when Gemini cites the Onion in a search summary, is it the network architecture doing something uniquely ‘AI’ or is it the model extending behaviors present in the training data?
While there are mechanical reasons confabulations occur, there are also data reasons which arise from human deficiencies as well.
Nope, but there’s a whole thread of people talking about how LLMs can’t tell what’s true or not because they think it is, which is deliciously ironic.
It seems like figuring out what’s bullshit on the Internet is an everyone problem.
It’s faked.
This image was faked. Check the post update.
Turns out that even for humans knowing what’s true or not on the Internet isn’t so simple.
“Have you accepted the al pastor into your heart?”
That’s sweet she came in from Canada to visit him.
Just means wesker will need to marry an AI.
Literally just after talking about how people are spouting confident misinformation on another thread I see this one.
Twitter: Twitter retains minimal EXIF data, primarily focusing on technical details, such as the camera model. GPS data is generally stripped.
Yes, this is a privacy thing, we strip the EXIF data. As long as you’re not also adding location to your Tweet (which is optional) then there’s no location data associated with the Tweet or the media.
People replying to a Twitter thread with photos are automatically having the location data stripped.
God, I can’t wait for LLMs to automate calling out well intentioned total BS in every single comment on social media eventually. It’s increasing at a worrying pace.
This is one of those things where I truly don’t care if it’s real or not, as my life is better for knowing about it either way.
The worst was the week where they added accuracy to the arc weapons so after a long mission, usually right at extraction, the people using arc weapons would have accuracy go over an overflow and crash the game for everyone.
I just didn’t play at all until that was patched after a while.
People got so fucking angry being told they couldn’t bring arc weapons because it would literally crash the fucking game. No dude, I’m not telling you how to play, I’m telling you what’s going to ruin the entire run for everyone involved, including yourself.
I find if I play on the higher difficulties I tend to end up in very fun groups.
If I play on more relaxed difficulties, I usually have random people running across the map aggroing everything and then throwing their orbital barrage on top of me on the console doing the objective before setting themselves on fire somehow without even using any fire stratagems.
It’s the back and front of a single sheet of paper.
It’s the scene from Total Recall where the character in the top comment keeps repeating the phrase “Open your mind…”
Where did I insult you?
“Wooosh” is a standard meme in reference to missing the point of a post or comment.
There was an entire sub on Reddit about it.
If you are getting offended at memes, perhaps it’s a good opportunity to exercise nonattachment?
You haven’t used Cursor yet, have you?