The concept of speaking freely is not exclusive to legislation. Musk specifically bought this platform because, according to himself, he saw it as an important place for human discourse and the freedom to speak your mind was being inhibited by the policies around moderation. Which is ironic because he implements policies that ban you for speaking out over arbitrary topics while the previous policies simply banned hate speech.

Musk couldn’t care less about free speech. He has implemented a policy that bans you for using the word “cisgender” while he responds to nazi propaganda with personal admiration.

Civilians? Never heard of 'em!

Criticising Judaism doesn’t make you an anti-semite. There’s valid criticisms to be raised against most religions, this can be done without resorting to hostility or prejudice.

As if they’ll lower the price once they’ve recouped the R&D costs ten times over.

You’ve confused freedom with anarchy. By your logic you should be able to murder anyone you please or else it’s not a free country.

You’ve confused freedom with anarchy. By your logic you should be able to murder anyone you please or else it’s not a free country.

You’ve already had your 5 minute happy thought break. Go back to being miserable!

Angry X’ing

He made a thousand dollar donation in support of proposition 8, a constitutional amendment in California that strips gay people of the right to marry. He then proceeded to argue that such a donation does not make him a bigot or an enemy of LGBTQ+ people, because he’s a delusional piece of filth.

This effectively prevented gay people from marrying in California from 2008 to 2013 until the fascists that supported it were finally done trying to argue how this doesn’t violate the US constitution.

So yeah, may he, his browser, and any pathethic excuse that pretends to be human being who supported this abomination rot in the deepest depths forever.

The fact that their founder wants to ban gay marriage is enough reason for me to avoid it like the plague.

Calm down, no one’s getting exploited. Many people like trying out new features that aren’t available yet for stable releases.

Free speech absolutist.

No, it just keeps going indefinitely.

Duh. Most people want money, the work itself is just a means to an end. And even many of the people that do enjoy their work would do something different with their life if money wasn’t an issue.

It’s because the research in question used a really small and unrepresentative dataset. I want to see these findings reproduced on a proper task collection.

ArXiv papers are never peer reviewed.

This paper is pretty unbelievable to me in the literal sense. From a quick glance:

First of all they couldn’t even bother to check for simple spelling mistakes. Second, all they’re doing is asking whether a number is prime or not and then extrapolating the results to be representative of solving math problems.

But most importantly I don’t believe for a second that the same model with a few adjustments over a 3 month period would completely flip performance on any representative task. I suspect there’s something seriously wrong with how they collect/evaluate the answers.

And finally, according to their own results, GPT3.5 did significantly better at the second evaluation. So this title is a blatant misrepresentation.

Also the study isn’t peer-reviewed.

deleted by creator

Can’t speak for Vegas, that’s on an entirely different continent. But it helped that there were 5 of us.