Dukeofdummies

That’s what I was wondering, it’s 12km at it’s widest, so 6 km max from the border. A balloon, a series of drones a spyplane has range, which Israel doesn’t need. The same drones that were keeping eyes on the George Floyd protests in Minneapolis could stay in the air longer and use less fuel.

Even then either is going to just show groups of people, you’d need hours of steady footage to even attempt to make deductions. I would’ve figured it’d be a stream of several drones for 24/7 coverage.

so then, do they get along with other spiders as well? maybe we can finally farm some spider silk without the genetic splicing?

Until you realize that the people who make the final decision on whether something the AI saw is indeed too far or extreme are the exact same people making the decision now and all we’ve succeeded in doing is creating a million dollar system that makes it look like they’re trying to change.

So fix that. Don’t make an AI to dole out justice against police like some messed up lottery. This is such a hollow solution in my mind. AI struggles to identify a motorcycle, people expect it to identify abuse?

I am so confused by this, why does there need to be AI involved in this at all?

If somebody has a complaint, pull the footage, then the plaintiff goes over the footage and makes their case against the police officer. Why would an AI be necessary to find complaints that are not being complained about?

I feel like it’s a technology solution for what should be a “more transparency and a better system” solution. Make complaints easier and reduce the fear factor of making complaints.

It’s because a person can crank out a deep fake in 3 hours, and a crappy one in one. It never cropped up because… well lets be real it was a couple of weirdos that were doing it, unless it bubbles up from the dark corners of the internet you risk the Streisand effect by bringing attention to it.

AI can crank out 40 in a minute. 7200 in three hours. That’s an entirely different beast. The sheer mass and volume ramps up the odds of any image bubbling up from the dark corners of the web falling into the limelight and now this problem that wasn’t big enough to merit thought is rearing up it’s ugly head right in front of us.

You can generate unique pictures of Taylor Swift faster than even Taylor swift can generate pictures of Taylor Swift. Within one hour of Taylor swift being seen with a man (and you have enough images of the man) you can create a dozen images of her on a date with that man and attempt to sell them to paparazzi.

The problem is volume. Just like how email made everyone connected and allowed the Nigerian Prince scandal to occur.

Secondly (more controversially), is a picture of a noose racist? I mean, it certainly has racist connotations and I personally wouldn’t have used it, but (bear with me) I’m not sure racist is the concrete conclusion. Lots of people have been hung throughout history, if you’re not viewing it through a racial lens then are you a racist or just very insensitive.

I see what you’re saying… but it seems like a technicality that’s not worth exploring here.

If instead it was a guillotine with a caption of “this year’s detention activity”… it’s really not any better. Like it’s no longer racist but… now it’s just purely about killing kids in a more equitable homicidal format. It’s very dark humor in a very public place.

It’s a lot of time and effort and argument to debate “yeah this was terrible but it might not have been racist”. Does a definitive answer of “at least it wasn’t racist” make this appreciably any better? Does it make them any more likely to get a teaching job after this?

It also doesn’t change the core argument the teacher is making in the story. “You lumped me in with a bunch of racists because I was white. I took down the image because it was offensive. Obviously. Why would I leave it up if it was offensive?”

“at scale” it could be just as bad. C02 isn’t poisonous the big problem we’re dealing with is we’re putting C02 from the ground in oil and coal and putting it into the air. We’ve been adding C02 that was NOT in the environment into the environment.

Yeah some water isn’t a bad thing, but if all of a sudden we’re adding from sources outside of the water cycle a LOT more water into the atmosphere you’ve got increased clouds, increased weather patterns, All of a sudden the inland portions of continents can start dumping as much water into the air as a warm ocean, that can DEFINITELY be a problem.

… I mean it wouldn’t imbalance C02 but you would be adding water. At scale that could be just as bad.

Carbon neutral, yes, but water positive.

While this looks cool, my phone can’t actually scan any of these. Anybody else have any luck?