- 0 Posts
- 107 Comments
Australian Army, like the other comment said. The shoulder insignia look to be a LTGEN if I count the pixels right; seems to be a crown and crossed sword and baton on her shoulder.
Compare: https://www.army.gov.au/about-us/ranks
Edit: Found her: Lieutenant General Michelle Irene McGuinness, CSC, promoted to lieutenant general and appointed National Cyber Security Coordinator in February 2024.
She was cited in an article about the incident: https://dailysecurityreview.com/news/medisecure-data-breach-update/NGL, kinda proud I figured out the rank before I thought of looking for news articles.
deterministicnominativism?
71·5 days agoGurss where the LLMs picked up those dashes?
Human writing.
Yes, turns out humans use them too—particularly in the type of serious, professional writing that these models seek to emulate—and have done so before the slopmachines and some of us continue to do so even in an age where this stye we have adopted—whether by necessity of our occupation, by choice for hobbies or simply by spending enough time reading the type of text that uses them profusely—is mindlessly imitated by machines incapable of intuitively deciding which tone is most appropriate for the given occasion—or, really, any incapable of any intuition or semantic distinction.
AI slop may contain em-dashes, but that implication is not reversible—not every em—dash user is an artificial slop generator. My slop is perfectly natural, thank you very much.
Our job is to teach the machines so well that there will be no need to pay our children for anything.
Yeah, that’s the bullshit the grifters are peddling at least
writing great code manually is a core skill whose time has passed.
If you’re saying people will no longer have to learn to code…
This is not the death of expertise. The LLM is fast. You are slow, but you carry with you a lifetime of experience, judgment calls, and understanding.
…then where the fuck is that expertise gonna come from?
You are also (hopefully) much less prone to hallucination and being mislead by bad or malicious inputs, and are accountable to yourself, your teammates, and to Proton in a way a model can never be. Together you can do far more, far faster than either can do alone.
AI “hallucination” is the product of something that doesn’t know what it’s doing accidentally doing something wrong despite all training in appearing competent. To correct and counteract that, you need people who actually learned what is correct and know their shit. In essence: you need people with experience in writing good code.
Even if we accepted the premise that needing to adopt AI would be the only way to survive, this logic is so full of holes that I’m wondering whether an LLM wrote it or whether that’s just the best logic Butler can deliver after outsourcing his thinking to bullshit machines.
AI art is never going away, get over it
This you?
OP is pretty much the only contributor to !AIGenerated@lemmy.world, so forgive me if I don’t take their post here as good faith.
Ed Zitron (wheresyoured.at) is a newsletter-author that works in PR in the tech industry. That means he both has to read a lot of tech news articles to stay on top of the current developments, and he’s familiar with corporate marketing bullshit.
He has written a lot about the fucked-up state of modern economy, with some of my favourite pieces being his explanation of the history of Shareholder Supremacy and the Rot Economy. He also wrote a lot about crypto-fanaticism, the blatant lies about working from home and more. I’m picking posts more or less at random here, because there’s both some degree of repetition and a lot of cross-linking to other posts if you want to read more.
Naturally, he has also written a lot about the issues with AI and the cracks in the bubble (even if it has now lasted a lot longer than he’d initially hoped, he has since revised his expectations). This is a breath of fresh air in a media landscape dominated by AI boosters.
Anyone know why they would be given credit?
Because they’ve been bleating on about how they’ll replace almost all software development, which surely will make them such a critical pillar of any industry relying on software that they’ll be able to print money! Or at least keep growing infinitely, since, as Ed Zitron has laid out, growth is pretty much all that modern investors seem to care about.
Specifically, Anthropic’s Chief Bullshitter has claimed that in 3 to 6 months, AI will be writing 90% of the code software developers were in charge of. That was back in Mar 2025. Apparently, that panned out so well, that he doubled down in Jan 2026, again claiming that AI Models Will Replace Software Engineers In 6-12 Months (the original article this one points to seems to be a dead link, which makes me wonder whether they took it down after it turned out bullshit).
I imagine there are enough gullible people that fall for it or gamble on the fact that they’re too big to fail and surely will get bailed out if they get in hot water.
Doesn’t mean they don’t have owners (shareholders = owners of some part of the company) with the power to make decisions, just that they don’t pay out profits to their owners or shareholders. As a result, decisions aren’t motivated by personal enrichment, but by furthering the mission of the company.
On paper, anyway.
Should’ve been the 26th then. Can we trace it back to some key incident on that date?
2·14 days agoSo cool and edgy 😍
Since a part of the funding the humanities are starved of is directed to STEM, it may be less arduous there. Problems of sexism won’t be much better, but maybe at least closer to the societal norm, which might be the most depressing sentence I’ve written in a while.
What do you mean with “get results”, by the way?
If you want a read about the humanities in particular, here’s a history PhD’s commentary on his experience: https://acoup.blog/2021/10/01/collections-so-you-want-to-go-to-grad-school-in-the-academic-humanities/
What’d it get you? A sense of pride and accomplishment?
There are multiple services, which may count the contributions differently, so you’ll probably want to consult more than one or at least compare criteria to see which one best fits your definition. The two dominant ones seem to be:
I’m curious what the image is supposed to show
Rough guess by an allemand
the company had acted “on the best understanding we had of the legislation at the time”.
“We thought we could get away with fucking your environment”
They better start arresting these ghouls.
Anthropic is basically a SaaS provider, in this case selling access to their code generation tool. Like many large SaaS-providers, it’s deeply predatory, deceitful about the capabilities of their products, eager to sell promises it won’t keep to executives who won’t care in the hopes of locking them into using their mediocre platform and eventually charging enough to justify the insane amounts of debt they’re taking on.
So really, it’s more like the kid is using other people’s money to pay for a tool they don’t understand to do a job they’ve never worked in and gets hailed as a genius. They’ll make a great executive some day.