Why would you even bother reading the summary if you don't care enough about the contents to actually engage with it meaningfully? It's 13,000 words. It's 52 pages of a Harry Potter novel, and you used to be able to devour those. If you believe that AI is as transformative as a lot of people here seem to think it is, maybe it is worth mulling over and digesting the public statement put out by the single largest organized religious body in the world for real, instead of getting a potentially hallucinated reply by an AI who might have prompting to misrepresent the contents of such a statement.
The number of words in a passage does not make the reading level the same. From a quick skim, this is a highly dense piece of material and isn't a quick read like paperback fiction written for kids...
I get your point, but also
1) It helps me focus on the themes first, like scanning a good non-fiction book to know what I am diving into
2) I'm not catholic, but would love some context going in on it.
3) It's a lot of individual blocks and I'd like to know does that mean they're leary, pro, what are the guidelines so helping find the themes or key topics like is there a benefit to AI and maybe using it to summarize and getting to this parapgrah quickly: 0. In light of the foregoing discussion, the differences between human intelligence and current AI systems become evident. While AI is an extraordinary technological achievement capable of imitating certain outputs associated with human intelligence, it operates by performing tasks, achieving goals, or making decisions based on quantitative data and computational logic. For example, with its analytical power, AI excels at integrating data from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and fostering interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can help experts collaborate in solving complex problems that “cannot be dealt with from a single perspective or from a single set of interests.”[64]
52 pages is a bit of an investment to pick up and read a random item, and I suspect the reading speed will be much lower than a fictional novel given the different density of the material. Think of it like an abstract for a research paper, a short 1 or 2 paragraphs of information to see if you want to dive deeper or not, though it is subpar to an actual abstract if one exists as it is more likely to misrepresent the content.
(One can argue that it appearing on HN, the votes it gets, and the comments it gets work as strong signals meaning it is unfair to consider it any random writeup, but I think the point stands in the more general case when HN isn't providing signaling.)
That's my worry too, I'd like one or two, but 1) will either never be in line for them 2) or can only find via secondary market at 3 or 4x the price...
Richard Scarry’s books were such a cozy universe growing up, I'd still like to live in "What people do all day." I wonder what that book would look like if he made it today.
I left the Old Country for my adopted country in part because it reminded me of "What do people do all day" – although I was not conscious of the resemblance until my father, having seen the not-a-pig dude from the city coming around with a little vehicle specially outfitted to water various geraniums, pointed it out.
Actually the modern publishing of What do people do all day removed a bunch of the jobs. I don't have info on why they did that, but if you want to read it make sure to get the original unabridged (uncensored?) version.
Also something about the characters gives me the cold, dead feel AI generated art (even though they do not appear to be AI generated). Can't put my finger on exactly what it is, though.
The posts are from 2015-2020 so these are definitely human-made. Here's some things that are probably giving you that feeling:
* every pose is pretty static, nobody's actively doing anything, they're just sitting or standing in the middle of their workplace - Scarry's folks are always running around doing something.
* lots and lots of wide eyes with the pupil not touching any part of the edge, which makes them look like a dead doll - I'm looking through some Scarry drawings and he almost never does this, and when he does it's with a much smaller, simpler eye that doesn't require any rendering.
* in general these drawings are much more detailed than Scarry's work, there's a lot of nervous repeated mark-making going on, and that would prove to be a hallmark of AI imagesludge a few years later.
* "cold and dead" might be something being deliberately aimed for here, "look at all these people who are dead inside" is a definite vibe I could see going for with a project like this - Scarry wants you to like everyone he draws and I do not think this artist wants you to like any of these people.
* Scarry's animal people all basically look like cute babies due to his choices of detail and stylization. These all look more like taxidermied animals in a clever pose, due to radically different choices in those domains. One of these things is cute and appealing on an instinctual level. One of these things is kind of creepy.
You should check out Andy's History of Databases (CMU Databases / Spring 2020) on youtube. He does the entire first class from the streets of Amsterdam because he can't get in his hotel... he's an interesting character and he's insanely good at explaining the ins and out
reply