You know what you are absolutely right — Organisations are indeed falling for what is known as the doorman fallacy: reducing rich and complex human roles to a single task and replacing people with AI. This overlooks the nuanced interactions and adaptability humans bring to their work.
These numbers are a bit daft to consider in isolation.
Badenoch is completely useless, and way to far the right of traditional conservative values. But she's also not got a snowball's chance in hell of ever becoming PM so people aren't as bothered by her as they would be if she was actually in charge doing these things.
In much the same way that no one would really care about starmer if he wasn't prime minister. The trouble is he is prime minister.
If it worked the way that it does in sci-fi I'd have no problem with it. If it could give us cures for cancer and reactionless drives everyone would be happy.
But it doesn't work like that and if they keep going along the lines of Large Language Models it'll never work like that. AI as it is right now is a barely functional toy that is being misused by virtually everyone and major businesses alike.
I am perfectly happy for AI research to continue but they need to be realistic about its capabilities and be honest about their valuations of companies. AI research should still be at the level of "in the lab", it is definitely not a product that should be commercially available yet.
It's the CEO that's claiming the technology is ready for prime time. Remember the board fired him at one point, presumably because he was suppressing information. The problem was they went about it in as stupid a way as possible, and ended up becoming pariahs because they were not public about what they were doing, and making it look like a power grab. But still they were probably right to fire him.
The thing is if space-based manufacturing became the norm then it would cease to be impractical to implement regulations and oversight. The reason it's difficult to do now is because getting to spaces difficult, but for space-based manufacturing to be feasible that problem already has to be solved.
I'm just confused about what products can be manufactured completely autonomously, in a 0G environment, and are profitable enough to make space-based manufacture economical.
Probably Pavlov it's basically just CoD multiplayer, plus a less janky Gary's Mod, in VR. I've just check my stats and I have months worth of play time. It's also a hell of a workout.
The trailers on the steam page don't really do it justice. It's mostly about the community.
If you're into racing there's also Gran Turismo, I'm pretty sure Euro truck / American truck simulator also supports VR, as of course does Elite Dangerous and if you're prepared to buy into it Star Citizen.
There's also loads and loads of indie games but I don't really know about those because my VR experience has been exclusively PlayStation limited, where those titles are not available. But I do know that ultra wings is extremely good because I've played it on a friend's headset.
I normally wouldn't say I was particularly interested in the VR chat style community playroom thing either but I had a lot of fun with Rec Room which is essentially the same thing but is available on PlayStation. The problem with those games is they tend to have a lot of kids in them who shouldn't really be in there since most of those games are 18 plus. But I take the view that if they're in there, then they're fair play, and you can just shoot them if they're being annoying.
Oh and there's a dungeons and dragons simulator which is very good. If you're into dungeons and dragons. Oh and loads of poker games.
Sorry this is a bit rambly, I just keep thinking of titles I've played over the years.
The thing about VR games is they don't tend to get huge advertising budgets because it's still quite a niche market so it looks like there isn't really a lot of options. But if you actually have a look on the VR page there's loads. There's even quite a good VR MMO who's name I can't quite remember, but that's quite good, if kind of dated looking.
I mean. I've used AI to write my job mandated end of year self assessment report. I don't care about this, it's not like they'll give me a pay rise so I'm not putting effort into it.
The AI says I've lead a project related to windows 11 updates. I haven't but it looks accurate and no one else will be able to dell it's fake.
So I guess the reason is they are using the AI to talk about subjects they can't fact check. So it looks accurate.
Yeah that's what I mean it's not an actual bill. It's a proposal and any idiot can ride a proposal.
I thought you were saying that they were actually definitively going to implement this and I don't think they are. It might even get as far as consideration but I can't think of a situation where they can actually mandate this without a feasibility study. Which will be fun to look at.
This is just something that the loud mouths are pushing.
Training and therapy absolutely. But this is about empathy, they are claiming the people are more empathetic when they experience a situation in VR than if they haven't experienced that situation ever in any medium.
I don't believe they've demonstrated that.
At best they've demonstrated the people are empathetic but they might be anyway. They definitely haven't demonstrated that that's a result of the VR experience. To do that they would have had to have taken some sort of test both before and after the VR experience to see if their attitudes have changed.
Training and therapy are appropriate uses for VR because they don't need to demonstrate that they are better than real world alternatives, because the benefit they have is cost. They are cheaper in VR than they are in the real world, that's the only metric they need to pass.
Really he's been pretty critical of Microsoft lately. I don't really have a problem with him personally, he definitely doesn't live in the real world though.
It's more about the fact that he's prepared to go along with it to further his own aspirations then he's necessarily into it himself. Not that that's much of a improvement.
Throwing other people under the bus for his own betterment is 100% on brand for him. Is absolutely able to turn a blind eye to the most appalling abuse if he thinks it'll further his objectives. It's the same reason people think he took Russian money, because obviously the Russians would have approached him and he's incredibly selfish and greedy so he would have taken the money if offered.
I'm assuming Epstein just thought that Tommy Robson was a loose cannon and shouldn't be brought into the inner circle. Given the fact that at least half his prosecutions have been entirely self-inflicted that's not a necessarily un realistic point of view.
You know what you are absolutely right — Organisations are indeed falling for what is known as the doorman fallacy: reducing rich and complex human roles to a single task and replacing people with AI. This overlooks the nuanced interactions and adaptability humans bring to their work.