oh shoot @ureskolasuveg - Tumblr Blog

Posts

wonders-of-the-cosmos

Storm at Saturn's north pole

Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/SSI/CICLOPS/Kevin M. Gill

klfg

[source]

klfg

🚨BREAKING: OpenAI published a paper proving that ChatGPT will always make things up.

Not sometimes. Not until the next update. Always. They proved it with math.

Even with perfect training data and unlimited computing power, AI models will still confidently tell you things that are completely false. This isn't a bug they're working on. It's baked into how these systems work at a fundamental level.

And their own numbers are brutal. OpenAI's o1 reasoning model hallucinates 16% of the time. Their newer o3 model? 33%. Their newest o4-mini? 48%. Nearly half of what their most recent model tells you could be fabricated. The "smarter" models are actually getting worse at telling the truth.

Here's why it can't be fixed. Language models work by predicting the next word based on probability. When they hit something uncertain, they don't pause. They don't flag it. They guess. And they guess with complete confidence, because that's exactly what they were trained to do.

The researchers looked at the 10 biggest AI benchmarks used to measure how good these models are. 9 out of 10 give the same score for saying "I don't know" as for giving a completely wrong answer: zero points. The entire testing system literally punishes honesty and rewards guessing.

So the AI learned the optimal strategy: always guess. Never admit uncertainty. Sound confident even when you're making it up.

OpenAI's proposed fix? Have ChatGPT say "I don't know" when it's unsure. Their own math shows this would mean roughly 30% of your questions get no answer. Imagine asking ChatGPT something three times out of ten and getting "I'm not confident enough to respond." Users would leave overnight. So the fix exists, but it would kill the product.

This isn't just OpenAI's problem. DeepMind and Tsinghua University independently reached the same conclusion. Three of the world's top AI labs, working separately, all agree: this is permanent.

Every time ChatGPT gives you an answer, ask yourself: is this real, or is it just a confident guess?

magnetictapedatastorage

the actual source, because the link is just to the screenshotted tweet:

Like students facing hard exam questions, large language models sometimes guess when uncertain, producing plausible yet incorrect statements

souf-vs-staff

You should be able to listen to a full album without looking at your phone. You should be able to watch a 3 hour film from beginning to end without checking social media. If you can't do this, you need to start training your attention span as if it were a physical muscle. I don't experience boredom or restlessness because I've trained my brain to not be dependent on quick stimuli and dopamine hits. If you can't chill on a park bench while waiting for a friend with just your imagination to keep you company, you need to learn how to do it ASAP because one day we may not have access to the internet.

heckinpupperino

strangestmoons

Funny you should mention that

Wanna know who said that? Who mentored johnny depp’s lead attorney?

l-adultera

So, on the one hand I agree – attorneys often get shit for doing their job. But what this kind of fails to acknoledge is that in America we're operating within the jury system. The similarities to the OJ simpson case lay in that emotional manipulation of the jury. I think it's naïve to say twelve legal amateurs would make decisions like these rationally rather than emotionally. Even trained judges – in countries where they're actually the ones making the decisions – will be infuenced by their emotions. When you don't even have those years of legal training emotion is all you have. A good lawyer in such a system knows how to exploit that.

The outcome of the OJ Simpson trial was the result of soddy police work. But the turning points of that trial were things like OJ attempting to put on a glove that wouldn't fit (because it had dried and shrunken) and most importantly when it was revealed that one of the investitators who found the glove was a racist (notably they didn't prove he planted evidence because they didn't have to, that alone blew a big enough hole in his believability) – all of which appealed the jury's emotions. Add to that the fact that all happened to the backdrop of countless murders of black citizens by the LAPD that went unpunished. The narrative at the time was that OJs legal team abused and manipulated the system by using all of these things in their advantage. The reality is that the jury system invites appeal to emotions over appeals to logic because the end goal is, to put iy crassly, to emotionally manipulate twelve random people. Emotional manipulation isn't "hacking the system," it's just the system.

The reason Vasque's shoutout to her mentor feels so distasteful to me in spite of that is that nowadays it is pretty much accepted that Simpson did murder his wife and a young man coming to her aid. So for her to appeal to him is to be proud of having her client also "get away with murder," or rather domestic abuse. It's simply distasteful and shows her callousness on the subject.

The fact that the jury system invites emotional manipulation also doesn't mean defense attorneys are immune to criticism when it comes to their methods. In the case of Depp v Heard Vasques talked about spraying Depp's perfume in the bathroom so as to trigger Heard's PTSD. Vasques then got a friend of hers on the stand and testify that Heard supposedly showed no signs of PTSD after only one consultation, and then diagnose her with histrionic personality disorder on the stand. If there was ever a line to cross, she crossed it here.

It's also important to mention that Adam Waldman, the man behind Depp's team, is the one who leaked the clipped audios to the press – he admitted to it on the stand so this isn't speculation. The smear campaign was at least partly organized by Waldman and it's very unlikely that Vasques didn't know about it. So when we're hating the smear campaign we are hating his legal team. It wasn't "the press" – most bigger news papers were on Heard's side throughout the trial. The smear campaign happened online through bots and clipped audios, and Depps legal team was involved in both of these.

So to conclude, yes, hating defense attorneys who use the tools they have to defend their client is stupid, especially if you're not willing to also acknowledge that it's the system itself is flawed. But there is a still a line that Depp's legal team overstepped and everyone involved can and should be criticised for that.

morgansdeb

Yeah.

I think saying that Depp's lawyers were just "doing their job" is extremely disingenuous.

The main reason people claim "Amber is the real abuser" is because of the edited clips that Adam Waldman spread online with the help of "internet journalists" (aka YouTubers), which like you said, it's something he said on the stand (x)

And I don't have the screenshots right now, but Waldman also made it a habit to harass Amber on Twitter (such as posting pictures of photoshoots she did to "prove" she wasn't abused), as well as Amber's UK lawyer, Jennifer Robinson.

Camille Vasquez also went on to do multiple interviews post-trial, very much feeding the TikTok crowd that labeled her a girlboss feminist and the real-life Elle Woods, reminiscing about her cross-examination of Amber like it was a holiday vacation and how much a "woman's perspective" was needed for Depp's team (x)

She even made a TikTok alongside Mario Lopez (who has his own SA allegations) mocking Amber's testimony (x) The caption of the video even said "Now we can see Aquaman 2". There's no way Vasquez didn't know what she was doing here.

Here's the clip of her giggling about Robert Shapiro being her mentor, talking about how much she admired him, and how she watched the OJ Simpson trial when she was a kid. Now this is just tactless, and you pretty much already said why.

She even said that Amber needs to "grow up and stop being a baby" in one of the documentaries that was made after the trial. (x)

Here's Vasquez happily reacting to a TikTok a woman made imitating her while she was cross-examining Amber (x). On what planet is this considered professional?

And there is so much I could post right now, but the point is that yes, Depp's lawyers didn't just "do their job"; they behaved extremely unprofessionally to help their client continue to abuse his wife, by inviting the general public into doing it too and there's nothing wrong with hating them because they played a giant role in the smear of Amber's name and reputation.

arctic-hands

When I was a teenager and still on Neopets I was part of a pretty big Star Trek guild and eventually became part of its council, with the solemn duty of creating weekly polls. Well one day I created the poll "Which would win in a fight? Borg Cube or Death Star?". Naturally, since this was a Star Trek guild, the answer was overwhelmingly "Borg Cube", but someone did have the rationality to point out we were biased.

So I look up a pretty prominent Star Wars guild and message one of their council and ask them to poll the same question and get back to me in a week. They do, and naturally the fuckin geeks said "Death Star".

So then I look up a Stargate guild and messaged the lead council member, saying the same thing, and they get back to me almost immediately saying that the Death Star would immediately one-shot a Borg Cube but they would never be able to do it again to another Cube. And I took that wisdom back to my guild and we were mollified, and for one moment the Nerd World was peaceful.

evilsoup

gilliagandy

Truly thrilled to finally find this post on my dash.

gothe

muscles aren’t manly because muscles don’t belong to men. this sentiment is so ridiculous and sinister when you consider the fact that women’s bone density is less than men’s & decreases more than men’s does with age. we need muscle more but only men are encouraged to have it? fuck that. nothing belongs to men

also saying that muscled women are ugly or something is particularly disgusting in contrast with how underweight women are called pretty and ideal. health on a woman is ugly but self destructiveness is pretty? this bullshit needs to end already