I think I pay less than a dollar a month for my use of GPT-3 at the moment. I only used ChatGPT once but it seemed inferior and more restrictive than just using the API directly. Am I missing something?
It's easier to control than the API, in my view. With the API it's harder to get into a flow. ChatGPT also mixes the code and general purpose stuff much better than the API, and seems to have access to more data.
They can potentially become a blight. I'm not talking about a single classic car you're restoring, I'm talking about 3+ vehicles, some parked on driveway, others on the grass. They're homes for vermin and other animals, they're a disaster aesthetically and probably dangerous to kids in the neighborhood (sometimes they're on jack stands). They're often accompanied by stacks of tires and other debris.
I've lived off-grid in the desert, and I've seen certain people become 'garbage collectors' - a few cars turns into 20+, with all the associated junk. In the desert, nobody really cares - but you'd be crazy to move in next to one of those junk yards.
It's not going to ruin anyone's life, but it's definitely not nice. It depends on the community and circumstances I suppose.
> A living cow, pig, or sheep entered the killing floor on top of the slaughterhouse and met with a sledgehammer or captive-bolt, and descended each floor in bits of appreciating value, i.e., eventually exiting the bottom floor as packaged bacon or a side of ribs.
regarding the bacon - is that really correct? I thought bacon-making was a longer, more involved process that would probably have been done off-site (brining,curing,smoking,etc).
I believe bacon just describes the cut. In my area of the US, you can buy a package of uncured bacon right alongside the usual cured varieties. I don't know for sure, but I'd imagine the slaughterhouses described here wouldn't be doing any processing outside of the slaughtering, butchering, and packing.
FYI, the cut is pork belly. Uncured bacon is still processed in roughly the same manner as cured bacon but without direct use of nitrates. It is dubious to call it uncured however.
It's called pipelining. If you have 5 floors of space to work with, there's no reason you couldn't run a 48 or 72 hour bacon-making process on a portion of the pork running through the facility.
For anyone curious, the governor commuted his sentence in that case to 10 years, eligible for parole in 2026 [1]. It wasn't a simple accident though - it involved a great deal of negligence at the minimum.
Definitely makes me want to avoid discord. As far as Stability goes, it doesn't make them look great either. This kid showed a lot of good will and they still felt like they needed to pull the rug from under his feet.
>> Yes, to be utterly semantic, it is discriminatory. I don't know how this sits with me, but it is technically true. But, whether it sits well or not, it is virtually impossible to fiddle ourselves out of this quagmire of inequality without taking proactive _opposite_ steps.
I think there are additional externalities that need to be considered. For example, some of these discriminatory policies are going to cause strife, hate, and resentment, etc. in the people who need to be discriminated against. I think there may be unintended consequences that we're only beginning to see.
Discrimination causes problems that can take a long time to emerge and a long time to address. We're STILL seeing the effects of this on many minority groups - but the solution IMO isn't to do it all over again.
Maybe they should do something geographical. Let's say hire a person per country and then start again. You know building actually distributed and diverse teams.
Well first off, if you doubt it's true, all you need to do to disprove it is to provide a single example of white males being the subject of more risk than any other group by population, in any metric, that isn't genetic or similar. I haven't found one. Again, they are certainly included in risk-prone groups, as I listed, but as far as I can tell, not as the sole members of a most-risk-prone group.
Second, the whole point of all of this is to look at who is most at risk. Yes, white males do encounter risk. But that's not what's important: what's important is, who is most at risk? The answer, in the apparent absence of evidence to the contrary, would appear to be "not white males".
It's usually at this point, when someone says that this is divisive and not helpful, that we get to "All Lives Matter".
Black Lives Matter was explicitly intended to only point out the risks of being black in this country, in order to raise awareness of those unique risks, and to try to reach some social justice. This had the unfortunate side effect of shining a light away from white people's problems. White people still had problems, and they still wanted people to care. Some white people even felt personally attacked by Black Lives Matter. So white people found the phrase divisive, and made up a new phrase to take the focus away from BLM's core issues: All Lives Matter. "Don't worry about only black people's problems, because I want you to worry about my problems, too."
It may make white males feel that it's divisive, but really it's just difficult to accept that other people may be more in need, in one aspect or another. The goal of all this is to focus on the groups that are at the most risk, acknowledge them, and try to address their issues.
The US is dangerous no matter who you are. It's just that in every category of risk, it's less dangerous if you're a white male.
> Well first off, if you doubt it's true, all you need to do to disprove it is to provide a single example of white males being the subject of more risk than any other group by population, in any metric, that isn't genetic or similar.
White men are subject to more risk of being shot by police than black females.
White men are subject to more risk of being shot by police than white females.
White men are subject to more risk of being shot by police than any female of any skin color.
> It's just that in every category of risk, it's less dangerous if you're a white male.
False. The largest prediction for high risk for being shot by the police is social econimic status. Second largest predictor is being male. Third largest is african american skin color. Poor black male has the highest risk, and rich white female the lowest risk. White male as an demographic has higher risk than the average (50%) in the US population because the trait "male" is a larger predictor to risk of being shot by the police than the trait "white".
