• Naz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 minutes ago

      Unable to comply: Switching to a universe where the subject is deceased results in an out of scope error in execution handling.

      You have been assigned the only timeline where you are still conscious and alive to make this request.

      Due to privacy reasons, support cannot specify the precise conditions of termination in other timelines.

  • nanometer1625@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 hours ago

    His spouse reasonably complained that an audiobook wouldn’t be in his voice. But Sng wasn’t to be outdone in the zero-effort-parenting department.

    “I can train a voice model,” he countered, before addressing his readers: “Parenting hits different when you work in AI.”

    Sometimes I feel bad about myself, but at least I don’t say stuff like this.

  • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    22 hours ago

    It was considered unethical when Harlow did it to monkeys, but I guess it must be fine when parents do it to their own children, regardless of the ensuing panic disorders… 🤷

  • illi@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    If you want to optimize a parent-child time with AI, maybe optimize it with not having children instead.

    • cman6@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      Exactly what I was thinking. It makes me think of the book Four Thousand Weeks, and Chasing Daylight.

      The former is about the trap of productivity and thinking you can fit more into your day than you can. Hint: no matter how much you get done in your day, you will want to try to fit in more

      And the latter I don’t want to spoil but there was a quote along the lines of “Gene looked at all his colleagues who wanted more and thought, do they know when they will have enough?”, again the idea that we will always want more.

      Reading to your child and spending time with them is enough. Forget all the other distractions the world offers you.

      /rant

      • Madzielle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        19 hours ago

        I struggled to be a proper mom when my kid was a toddler.

        One of the few things I did absolutely right, was read to him every night. It was usually the best part of my day.

        “when will they have enough”… “prodictivity” is almost appearing to be the death of human connection these days, and to that, I just say, Komorebi mother fuckers.

    • RedWeasel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Politicians and governments around the world are already thinking we don’t have enough babies being born. Soon they will want to incentivize people to have children because of AI too. Just more “reasons” to justify it with the thought up ones already.

    • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Now this is the correct answer.

      Not sure what to tell those who thought they’d give it a whirl and found out it wasn’t for them, however 😅.

      • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        23 hours ago

        “Go play outside”

        “Play with your toys”

        “Do some arts and crafts”

        “Listen to an audio book”

        “Go read”

        … So many ways parents can get a break, this is just the same but different in a more creepy way and using something that sucks up all our resources and takes our jobs.

          • cman6@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 hours ago

            If we’re just talking about that specifically then actually it might be quite good to have an audio book that uses the parents’ voice, if we ignore privacy concerns about cloning your voice.

            But the context of the post is saying more than that. They’re talking about not spending time with the child and reading to them, which I think most people disagree with. Just as I think most people would disagree with just giving a child an audiobook instead of reading to/with them, irrespective of whose voice is being used

            • makeshift0546@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Oh nooooooo a parent took a break and a shortcut? Let’s make 800 assumptions and make up an entire MCU for this man to live in where we can make a million more assumptions that this guy is just abusing this kid.

              Y’all have widely taken a tweet out of context and misrepresented …… because AI.

              • YerLam@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                16 hours ago

                An audio book does not provide parental bonding time.
                An audio book doesn’t have words that can be pointed to by a parent.

                Clearer?

                • makeshift0546@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  15 hours ago

                  Not what I asked. But it’s okay, I’m SURE you’ve been screeching over the dangers of audio books for years 🤣👍

  • halfapage@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    1 day ago

    wow that’s pretty cool

    why not optimize even further? instruct the llm to just be you, hand over credentials to anything that is in your name, and then simply sit and wait for your meat body to wither away!

    optimal!

        • NateNate60@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Is that even true? That might only be in relation to other animals, not to robots. Humans do a lot of useless things like fart and laugh. Robots don’t. Even from an energy perspective, if a human takes 2,000 kilocalories to go about their day, that’s 8,400,000 joules or 2.3 kWh. A laptop battery is around 75 Wh, so that’s around 30 laptop batteries for 16 hours of activity, many of which might just be sitting down at a desk to think.

          • applebusch (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            19 hours ago

            a laptop isnt capable of even a teeny tiny baby fraction of what a human brain can do. the only thing a laptop can do better than a human is calculating and data recall. the entire reason we made computers was to augment those weaknesses in our minds, because theyre so useful. but in terms of data processing, learning, prediction, planning, a laptop is basically an abacus being compared to a supercomputer, and thats being extremely generous to the abacus. human brains have had billions of years of evolution demanding more performant brains under severe energy restrictions. yeah we’re way way way more efficient than any computer.

            • NateNate60@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              18 hours ago

              This is a post about AI. While a computer will probably not in the near future be able to simulate a human brain fully, artificial intelligence models are getting scarily close to being able to pretend to do everything that a human can do. That’s what I was getting at. But of course, one should still not lose track of the overall point here that replacing the human experience with AI is completely missing the plot, even if it is “more efficient”.

      • halfapage@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        I don’t think there are machines with coefficient of versatility to efficiency as good as our bodies yet

  • MadPsyentist@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    22 hours ago

    But this is what they do to thier kids “baby sitter. Read my child a story! It’s being annoying!”

    This is how the ultra rich deal with their kids. They dont understand that this isnt how normal people deal with kds genraly.

  • eicker@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Big Tech spent years designing platforms that steal our attention, then sold us AI tools to compensate for the time we lost. Now apparently even spending time with your kids is inefficient. The endgame is becoming obvious: humans do the work, AI gets the attention, and Silicon Valley collects the subscription fees. Apparently being a parent is just another productivity bottleneck.

    • 🌸𝓯𝓵𝓸𝔀𝓮𝓻🌸@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Apparently being a parent is just another productivity bottleneck.

      Always has been. Women have been paid less or just fired because they want to take care of the children. Usually by the same people complaining there aren’t enough kids now.