A human being from a Finland.
He has a child.
He knows what it would mean for the child if he sat years behind bars. That changes the calculation quite a bit!
A loving parent won’t get themself in a jail unless it’s something that benefits the child enough to cover for losing a parent for many years.
Suspended sentences work so that if you trigger the activation of the suspended sentence during the probation time, the whole length of the suspended sentence starts rolling. Therefore, if at 4 years and 11 months of a 5-year probation you do a crime that triggers the activation of your suspended sentence, you sit 7 years. And if you commit the same crime on day 8 of the probation, you still sit the same 7 years.
At least over here in Finland it can also work so that the suspended sentence is only a couple of months for some crimes, but the probation is still 4 years or 6 years or whatever. People often read that “damn, only two months and they are free”, but in reality it means you must spend 5-ish years having to be mindful of not doing any similar-ish, even much less serious, crime or you’ll find yourself sitting behind bars for those two months plus whatever the repeated offence carries.
It is implied in the article that the chatbot was able to point out details about the image that the reporter either could not immediately recognize without some kind of outside help or did not bother looking for.
So, the chatbot added making the reporter notice something on the photo in a few seconds that would have taken several minutes for the reporter to notice without aid of technology.
You can see my comment history to determine if I’m an LLM or not :)
In any case, have fun in your circles!
If the part of the image that reveals the image was made by an AI is obvious enough, why contact a specialist? Of course, reporters should absolutely be trained to spot such things with their bare eyes without something telling them specifically where to look. But still, once the reporter can already see what’s ridiculously wrong in the image, it would be waste of the specialist’s time to call them to come look at the image.
The article says they used ChatGPT or some similar LLM bot. It says they used a chatbot, and that’s what the word chatbot means by default. A skilled reporter mentions if it was something else.
The reporter used a chatbot such as ChatGPT to ask if there’s anything suspicious in the image, the chatbot, by coincidence, happened to point out something in the photo that the reporter could then recognise as AI-generated indeed, and got on typing his article again.
The only part of this that is not mentioned in the article is that the reporter confirmed the referred spot in the image with his own eyes, but that is such an integral part of a reporter’s education that you need specific reasons to work against the assumption that this was done.
There’s hoping that the reporter then looked at the image and noticed, “oh, true! That’s an obvious spot there!”
This helps only if you wash your towel after each shower.
Yes. The government officials are representatives of the state. Whatever they do, the state does. The state’s (or county’s) doings are consequences of the elected council members’ decisions.
You vote wrong, your tax money might end up spent unwisely. (And often, you vote in a sensible manner, but most of your neighbours don’t. And then the money gets spent the way most of your neighbours had wanted. By doing stupid illegal raids and paying their consequences.)
This lead me to wondering: Do the Fahrenheit people talk about sub-zero as well?!
I had never thought of that possibility. 0 degrees is just generally cold, but -17,778 degrees is already in the area of “seriously cold”.
It hurts me that y isn’t th like it was in the past, or that x is not sh like it is in in Portuguese and Chinese. Why did they reverse those two in the otherwise excellent proposition?! :(
Withholding that amount of resources from others when you have no need for them yourself is a political position.
You also have to take rather extreme measures in order to become a billionaire.
And you sometimes pick one dandelion too many and forget how to walk faster than 3 km/h.
To be fair, most of Russian dissidents are angry about how the war is fought.
They would have wanted Ukraine to be taken over in a way that doesn’t spill Russians’ blood.
There are people in the Russia that are really against the whole war and want to see all of Ukraine’s territory liberated, but those are not many! I would estimate their number is somewhere between 100 and a bit over 1000 individuals. Among 140 million.
A good way to figure this is asking “who does Crimea belong to?”
Everyone who is really a dissident will say “Ukraine”, because in reality the case is crystal clear. Everybody who moved there knew it’s not part of the Russia in the same manner as other regions where the white-blue-red flag is waved. And yet they elected to move there. It’s a sad thing they’ll need to move away, yes, but they knew or at least had the responsibility to know what they are doing. And this is what Russian dissidents (both of them…) think.
But almost all “dissidents” will say “it’s complicated” or something similar. That’s how you know a person protesting against how the war is done.
And let me say: it is statistically extremely unlikely that the deported ones were among those 0,00071 % of the Russia’s population that are real dissidents.
This doesn’t really belong in this community. There’s nothing lunatic about it.
I worked in mid-level management for some time, and among the most important skills was the ability to recognize what is good enough.
If you have seven courses of action available, of which 3 are good, don’t spend time choosing the optimal one. If it is obvious right away, then good, go for that. But otherwise just make a decision. I often literally tossed a coin. I’ve got thousand things going on in my thoughts at once, and it makes no sense to disrupt them by trying to make something maybe 2% more optimal.
Just make a random pick and then deal with what comes. It’s really a good way to do stuff, regardless of whether you’re “successful” or not.
Nah. Nobody reasoned with him. He just got angry at Putin. He’s an animal of instincts and feelings, not one of logic. He does random things. A random decision can sometimes be good, sometimes bad.
You cannot really say anything about the quality of a decision just from it being in the group of “decisions that can also be chosen randomly”.
Uh, wine tasters?
And, de facto also people whose job is to strike deals for a company. And ambassadors, I’d say.
the people who hold the other keys are the ones most likely to lead a coup against putin.
They are also ones that will absolutely, unavoidably, get informed if Putin wants to launch nuclear weapons. It’s unlikely they will agree, so if Putin ever is to ask them to use their “keys”, he will show himself as an utmost danger to their lives, and they will therefore organize Putin to die within the next 15 minutes or so. And if he manages to hide in a bunker, he will be completely isolated there and will de facto no longer be the POTRF.
Someone else will then take over.
Back when I originally dabbled with using Linux on a computer of my own, maybe around year 2003 or so, I didn’t know about rm -rf and was many years from being an adult as well. But I did know about /dev/null, and was really fascinated by the concept of the /dev/ directory!
So, I tried removing a file by
# cat filename > /dev/null ``` . The next time I booted my computer, there was... An error message./dev/null: Not a file
From the perspective of a person who has now used Linux since 1998 (first with only user rights on my parents' computer) this sounds like an absolutely bonkers solution for that problem, but yeah: it's er-em-dash-rm-ef-slash level of error. And those do really happen. It's good to keep in mind what a n00b can be able to do!