naevaTheRat

joined 1 year ago
[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, if you want to keep them ready then bake them off above 100 C for 2 hours or so then whack em in something airtight so they don't hydrate again.

You can actually buy silica gel beads with an indicator dye that goes from blue to purple when wet so you can tell at a glance if they're ready.

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 9 months ago (4 children)

you need to boil the water out of them before use btw

Um people in India were well equipped and organised at least, idk about the rest. Hell the 1857 war for indepence was using the poms own training and weapons against them but long before that the various and sundry kingdoms did alright.

The British empire and their trade companies were just absurdly bloodthirsty and inhumane.

I'm not a usian but I do know that in one of your various wars some dude bought heaps of pom guns but not the right bullets for them so they got some terrible reputation for being unreliable because the bullets didn't work.

The Baker's was rifled, hence the name. I mean tbh from standing/crouching with ironsights on a real day it would be impressive today to shoot someone at 370 meters with one shot using a modern gun and these things were heavy as fuck. Idk specifically how that gun performed but we have a tendency to assume past tech was much worse than it actually was.

rifles are old. They had them widely used by like the 16th century with advanced bullet geometry coming in at like the 17th.

Guns were pretty accurate. In like the 17th century the test for British riflemen involved hitting a 3 foot target at 900 yards for highest grade.

they had rifles in like the 15th century. Widespread use by the 17th. Muzzle loading rifles. They were accurate within a meter at 900 yards.

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 9 months ago (5 children)

The guns were quite accurate. They had rifling etc long before the Maxim gun.

Being a top grade British rifleman required hitting a 3 foot wide target at 900 yards or something. That's pretty fucking good without glass optics.

They were slowish to fire, but they had paper cartridges that made it not too slow. Lower casualty rates probably have more to do with soldiers not being brainwashed yet, lots of people didn't actually shoot to kill. Compare the casualty rates of the colonial campaigns where soldiers didn't consider their enemy human.

9/10 installs malware

I thought they was saying they didn't mean llms will aid science not that llms wasn't the topic. Ambiguous in reread.

AI isn't well defined which is what I was highlighting with mentions of computer vision etc, that falls into AI and it isn't really meaningfully different from other diagnostic tools. If people mean agi then they should say that, but it hasn't even been established it's likely possible let alone that we're close.

There are already many other intelligences on the planet and not many are very useful outside of niches. Even if we make a general intelligence it's entirely possible we won't be able to surpass fish level let alone human for example. and even then it's not clear that intelligence is the primary barrier in anything, which was what I was trying to point out in my science held back post.

There are so many ifs AGI is a Venus is cloudy -> dinosaurs discussion, you can project anything you like on it but it's all just fantasy.

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

This seems like splitting hairs agi doesn't exist so that can't be what they mean. AI applies to everything from pathing algorithms for library robots to computer vision and none of those seem to apply.

The context of this post is LLMs and their applications

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They uh, still do the same thing fundamentally

Altman isn't gonna let you blow him dude

view more: β€Ή prev next β€Ί