That’s true for all the things that can have a query cost. What about those AI applications that don’t have any financial cost to the user? For instance, The Spiffing Brit continues to find interesting ways to exploit the YouTube Algoritm. I’m sure you can apply that same “hacker mentality” to anything with AI in it.

At the moment, many of those applications are on the web, and that’s exactly where a query costs can be a feasible way to limit the number of experiments you can reasonably run in order to find your favorite exploit. If it’s too expensive, you probably won’t find anything worth exploiting, and that should keep the system relatively safe. However, nowadays more and more AI is finding its way in the real world, which means that those exploits are going to have some very spicy rewards.

Just imagine if the traffic lights were controlled by an AI, and you found an exploit that allowed you to get the green light on demand? Applications like this don’t have any API query costs. You just need to be patient and try all sorts of weird stuff to see how the lights react. Sure, you can’t run a gazillion experiments in an hour, which means that you might not find anything worth exploiting. Since there would be millions of people experimenting with the system simultaneously, surely someone would find an exploit.

Based on this data, 48.6% of oil was used on the read. If we assume that about every other car becomes electric, that could cut the total oil demand by about 24%. That’s actually quite significant, but obviously it will happen so gradually that the oil industry should have enough time to adjust.

Eventually most cars will be electric, but even that won’t destroy the entire oil industry, because there are still many other uses for oil. It takes a while for various other industries to shift away from burning oil and gas, but when that happens the oil industry will be totally screwed.

This is a part of a bigger topic people need to be aware of. As more and more AI is used in public spaces and the internet, people will find creative ways to exploit it.

There will always be ways to make the AI do stuff the owners don’t want it to. You could think of it like the exploits used in speedrunning, but in this case there’s a lot more variety. Just like you can make an AI generate morally questionable material, you could potentially find a way to exploit the AI of a self driving car to do whatever you can think of.

That’s just human psychology at work. Many of these BS explanations are appealing to a certain type of mind.

That’s a very important distinction. Hard wasn’t the clearest word for that use. I guess I should have called it something else such as deceptive or misleading. The idea is that some pictures got a below 50% ratio, which means that people were really bad at categorizing them correctly.

There were surprisingly few pictures that were close to 50%. Maybe it’s difficult to find pictures that make everyone guess randomly. There are always a few people who know what they’re doing because they generate pictures like this on a weekly basis. The answers will push that ratio higher.

Yes but the question is why would anyone pay for ads like that? How is that investment going to make any sense?

If you look at the ratios of each picture, you’ll notice that there are roughly two categories: hard and easy pictures. Based on information like this, OP could fine tune a more comprehensive questionnaire to include some photos that are clearly in between. I think it would be interesting to use this data to figure out what could make a picture easy or hard to identify correctly.

My guess is that a picture is easy if it has fingers or logical structures such as text, railways, buildings etc. while illustrations and drawings could be harder to identify correctly. Also, some natural structures such as coral, leaves and rocks could be difficult to identify correctly. When an AI makes mistakes in those areas, humans won’t notice them very easily.

The number of easy and hard pictures was roughly equal, which brings the mean and median values close to 10/20. If you want to bring that value up or down, just change the number of hard to identify pictures.

My guess is that MS will figure out a different approach. Maybe the enterprise versions are behind a subscription while the consumer version stays the way it currently is. They could also take the Apple approach. Offer a little bit of something for free (like iCloud) and charge if you want more of it. There could also be specific features that are not available if you don’t pay (like Apple Music). MS could offer a certain part of consumer windows for free, and charge for some other part, like advanced settings.

You’re supposed to take a photo of the screen, get the film developed, use a marker to draw a big read circle to highlight the important part, scan the photo, and post the digital image it here.

This is the way.

Disappearing top bars. Sure, limited screen real estate and all that, but I find it annoying that I have to scroll up a bit to reveal a button I need. Let’s say I want to copy the URL of a website, but I still want to keep on browsing. I need to scroll up a bit in order to reveal the ULR bar. Then I need to scroll back down again to continue where I left off. Usually thats “bit of scrolling” means I’m way off where I used to be.

In case you wanted to hear the “first world problem of the day”, you’re welcome.

Yes. I’m aware that if you’re not watching it from a safe distance, it’s obviously not going to be very safe or enjoyable. My condolences.

Were anti-union? How is that possible? Why would anyone other than the CEO of the company be anti-union? So many things I don’t understand about America, but this union stuff has to be somewhere in the top 10.

Wouldn’t it be more democratic if the voice of the people would be heard in these matters? Americans say they love democracy, but somehow I’m not seeing much democracy being applied here.