Please let floppy disks die already. It was an absolute embarrassment of a technology. Hugely unreliable, fragile, offering a ridiculously small storage space. The only benefit it provided was ability to write data before flash drives and internet become widely available. Let it rest in pieces.
> It was an absolute embarrassment of a technology.
They seem tiny now, but floppies were huge back then because they gave regular people a simple way to save and move files. Writing them off today ignores how much they pushed personal computing forward.
The only thing cheaper were cassette tapes. Those were indeed unreliable, awfully slow, and couldn't store much data (but you probably already had a cassette player, so it was dirt cheap).
I used them a lot in the 80s and 90s and I don't ever recall losing data. Over the course of time, they will degrade, but I'm pretty sure a disk can last ten years.
The last 5.25" floppies I managed to read had about 30 years. They were kept in thick plastic sleeves sold by Acornsoft.
And 68% of American adults don't even know it [0]. Not to mention all the foreign slavery in the supply chain, or all the slavery we've directly enabled by 'toppling dictators' who wouldn't give us their shit.
Not contradicting the second part, but I want to emphasise that they are different things. Slavery (and capitalism) can be extremely inefficient and simultaneously wildly profitable.
Save yourself time reading it, it's just a shameless plug for some SaaS service.
The only reason why Waymo was denied access to New York is they haven't given a bribe big enough that the city government requested. That's it. As soon as Waymo gives they bribe they requested they'll be in New York.
Plausible take, but what about when a humanoid violates its rule and causes massive damage in a warehouse? Who pays? Who provides the evidence of what happened?
It proves LLMs always need context. They have no idea where your car is. Is it already there at the car wash and you simply get back from the gas station to wash it where you went shortly to pay for the car wash? Or is the car at your home?
It proves LLMs are not brains, they don't think. This question will be used to train them and "magically" they'll get it right next time, creating an illusion of "thinking".
Well, he posed a wrong question (incomplete, without context of where the car is) and got a wrong answer. LLM is a tool, not a brain. Context means everything.
Your question is an important one, but also one that has been extensively researched, documented and improved upon. Whole fields of science, like "Metaethics" deal with answering your question. Other fields of science with defining "normative ethics" aka ethics that "everyone agrees upon" and so on.
I may have misread your question as a somewhat dismissive sarcastic take or as a "Ethics are nonsense, because of who defines them". So I tried to answer it as an honest question. ;)
Not quite. You are describing "kinds of ethics" after ethics is an already established concept. I.e. actual examples of human ethics. Now the question is who defines ethics as concept in general. Humans can have ethics, but is it applicable to the computer programs at all? Sure, programs can have programmed limitations, but is that called ethics at all? Does my Outlook client has ethics, only because it has configured rules? What is the difference between my email client automatically responding to an email with "salesforce" mentioned and an LLM program automatically responding to a query with the word "plutonium"?
reply