only mike can judge me @smallcomebacknowyhear - Tumblr Blog

Coming back from the grave to say that I’m rewatching and Hooli-Con and Server Error continue to be my best double punch episodes. They have Dinesh and Gilfoyle working together as a cohesive unit (continuing from the previous episode the Keenan Vortex) and generally being their best level of banter without outright antagonism. AND of course the icing and cherry on the cake is Richard very outwardly acting like a petulant roach, treated by the narrative as such, and Jared quitting and calling him a reckless child. All with the warm fuzzy feeling of neatly wrapped up optimistic season end final scenes. (Bonus I love love love Gavin and Jack barkers rivalry through the season and I am always at the edge of my seat for “Jackson hole is out of the way, everyone knows that”)

I think binding arbitration/two days of the condor is a better masterclass in plot points coming together across season 1 and 2 for an interesting satisfying and funny conclusion. But season 4’s end will always have a special place in my heart.

#fun fact I first watched/listened to hoolicon on the tarmac waiting for a gate after landing #the hbo app loaded the sound but not video and I used all my data for that month listening to it twice in a row

depsidase

#‘denpok have I surrounded myself with sycophants who can’t tell me the truth?’ ‘#’…….no’#’thank you I really needed to hear that’

snowberry-pie

this has been discussed before but reducing female characters to the girlboss braincell holder in the name of combating misogyny in fandom is ironically also a form of misogyny

snowberry-pie

people love love loooove to go on and on and on about whiteguy #135336843’s internal torment and the nuances of his writing and then when it comes time to talk about women it’s all um actually she can do no wrong and holds the braincell and babysits the boys like a mother hashtag feminism. i hope you fucking blow up

#resurrecting this blog to say this is how Monica is in fandom but also in canon.#remember how her only character flaw is that she smokes cigarettes and so the one and only time we see her off the clock #she’s at a hookah bar. like they couldn’t take 2 minutes to come up with any other possible character trait for her #that we could glimpse in this one scene where she’s not working

st-just

This is just very funny to me.

kiloueka

Not even his robot child likes him

mollyjames

I feel like the big push for AI is starting to flag. Even my relatively tech obsessed dad is kinda over it. What do you even use it for? Because you sure as hell dont want to use it for fact checking.

There's an advertisement featuring a woman surreptitiously asking her phone to provide her with discussion topics for her book club. And like... what. Is this the use case for commercial AI? This the best you could come up with? Lying to your friends about Moby Dick?

lesbiananimeism

One of the big pushes tech companies are making for AI is entirely in the tool of convenience. Take Gemini for example, one of Google's really big pitches for it is in features like Help Me Read and Help Me Write, which are like the lowest tier use case for deep learning models but are also the two AI features that the average consumer will actually care about. Sure they advertise the GenAI stuff Gemini Advanced is able to do, but they've woken up to the idea that the average consumer does not care about GenAI and non-AI Bros fundamentally loathe GenAI.

Every company with a language model got sucked into the venture capital pitfall of AI and now have to market the one set of features the general person actually cares about.

rageagainstthechristine

I work in advertising and the culture shift surrounding AI even from January until now (end of March) has been drastic. At the beginning of the year, the company I work for was using AI to design most of their assets. Clients started coming back and requesting that we no longer use AI generated images or videos for copyright liability reasons. Basically, there's no way to tell whose art or photography was scalped to make an image, so as companies who are trying to make a profit using potentially stolen images, it puts them in a gray area, legally.

Also, companies do look at their comment sections. Anti-AI commenters on social media ("this is not a real image" "I don't trust companies who use AI" etc) are seen by higher ups of a company. Basically, keep bullying brands who use AI, it's working. Now my company uses almost no AI for deliverables, which is a huge win.

parkchanwoohoo

ineffable-writer

Asking AI for information is like asking your drunk uncle for information. Usually wrong, definitely untrustworthy, and a little bit racist.

#Erlich would do this #if 2025 was the year they had to write him off the show this is how they’d do it.#Erlich loses his passport so he can’t fly home. he’s stuck like in the terminal

grimeclown

Its like. It's it's really something that the richest man in the world desires internet clout more than anything. Like he wants specifically the kind of clout you get on reddit or 4chan by being a poster like he wants to be a high tier Video Gamer he wants the specific kind of respect you get from being a competitive smash player who posts really good online. But he's just not good. At any of these things . And it's really something. That he has more money than god. But he can't be happy because he can't get a genuine laugh out of the twitch chat.

cognitohazardous

im surprised no one is talking about how elon musk paid people to make high level hardcore characters for him so he could claim it was all his work on livestream only to be immediately exposed as he couldn't even play the game right

cognitohazardous

like holy shit

bigandretired-deactivated202501

#I’m sure I’ve reblogged this but it bears repeating #Gavin tweets like this about Richard

oneheadtoanother

closet-keys

#this is. an sv C plot about Gavin belson. like how is this the world were actually living in #Mike judge is just ahead of his time yet again

algorithmist

propaganda for joining the war on drugs on the side of drugs

probablyasocialecologist

A test of AI for Australia's corporate regulator found that the technology might actually make more work for people, not less.

Artificial intelligence is worse than humans in every way at summarising documents and might actually create additional work for people, a government trial of the technology has found. Amazon conducted the test earlier this year for Australia’s corporate regulator the Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) using submissions made to an inquiry. The outcome of the trial was revealed in an answer to a questions on notice at the Senate select committee on adopting artificial intelligence. The test involved testing generative AI models before selecting one to ingest five submissions from a parliamentary inquiry into audit and consultancy firms. The most promising model, Meta’s open source model Llama2-70B, was prompted to summarise the submissions with a focus on ASIC mentions, recommendations, references to more regulation, and to include the page references and context. Ten ASIC staff, of varying levels of seniority, were also given the same task with similar prompts. Then, a group of reviewers blindly assessed the summaries produced by both humans and AI for coherency, length, ASIC references, regulation references and for identifying recommendations. They were unaware that this exercise involved AI at all. These reviewers overwhelmingly found that the human summaries beat out their AI competitors on every criteria and on every submission, scoring an 81% on an internal rubric compared with the machine’s 47%. Human summaries ran up the score by significantly outperforming on identifying references to ASIC documents in the long document, a type of task that the report notes is a “notoriously hard task” for this type of AI. But humans still beat the technology across the board. Reviewers told the report’s authors that AI summaries often missed emphasis, nuance and context; included incorrect information or missed relevant information; and sometimes focused on auxiliary points or introduced irrelevant information. Three of the five reviewers said they guessed that they were reviewing AI content. The reviewers’ overall feedback was that they felt AI summaries may be counterproductive and create further work because of the need to fact-check and refer to original submissions which communicated the message better and more concisely.

3 September 2024

spiribia

we do need to revisit the wording of "you can't have your cake and eat it too" because i don't think it clearly enough conveys that it's more that you can't simultaneously retain a cake and also get to consume it (which would render you cakeless). for years i was like But why not....it's my cake....?

ferrettoy

this fucking problem is how they caught the unabomber

m0thmancore

hey you should uh. elaborate. for my own personal satisfaction

ferrettoy

the unabomber was pedantic about idiomatic phrases like "have your cake and eat it too" and rephrased it to "eat your cake and have it too" (which to be very fair makes sense). fast forward to when he starts writing manifestos. he uses the phrase word for word in his pedantic style and his brother (who has been keeping his eyes on the unabomber shit for obvious reasons) notices the phrase and is like "oh fuck that's my fucking brother no one else fucking says that" and calls in an FBI tip

#if this happened in the 2010s the guys would think Richard was the unabomber