Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » Elon's AI will summarize bills so congress can't play their favorite game anymore
  1. Results 1 to 21 of 21
  2. Page 1 of 1

Thread: Elon's AI will summarize bills so congress can't play their favorite game anymore

post 1698621953 03-02-2024, 01:51 PM
-
#1
  1. 128
  2. We on TV?
  1. 128
  2. We on TV?
  3. Join Date: Mar 2005
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 64,672
  6. Rep Power: 351111

Elon's AI will summarize bills so congress can't play their favorite game anymore



post 1698622123 03-02-2024, 01:55 PM
-
#2
  1. Polaris
  1. Polaris
  3. Join Date: Feb 2003
  4. Posts: 63,722
  5. Rep Power: 568352
Unfortunately, I highly doubt that it will make any difference in the grand scheme of things.
post 1698622563 03-02-2024, 02:10 PM
-
#3
  1. NitrogenWidget
  1. NitrogenWidget
  3. Join Date: Dec 2010
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 43,261
  6. Subscribers: 1
  7. Rep Power: 349299
Originally Posted By Polaris⏩
Unfortunately, I highly doubt that it will make any difference in the grand scheme of things.
yep.
you see the usual chit-libs regularly defending bills that don't even do what the dems claim they do.
brb "secure the border" bill. 10% of the bill actually goes towards the border the rest goes to other countries.
chit-libs defend it tooth and nail and pretend it was an actual bill needed to secure our border which is odd because they have made it clear they want our border wide open.

grok is a decent name for an AI though.
i wonder when it summarizes if it lists which earmark belongs to which politician.
post 1698646243 03-02-2024, 11:44 PM
-
#4
  1. Weightaholic
  1. Weightaholic
  3. Join Date: Nov 2005
  4. Location: Australia
  5. Age: 54
  6. Posts: 34,904
  7. Rep Power: 82209
Given that current "AI", in a lot of cases just makes **** up out of whole cloth, sure thing Elon.
My personal pronouns are: Don't talk to me/Fck off
post 1698647583 03-03-2024, 12:46 AM
-
#5
  1. Derplington
  2. Registered User
  1. Derplington
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Oct 2018
  4. Age: 56
  5. Posts: 5,799
  6. Rep Power: 0
Your typical Republican voter (and misc R&Per) doesn't care about what's in a bill. All they care about is whether Trump says it is good or not.
post 1698647763 03-03-2024, 01:02 AM
-
#6
  1. foXs
  2. ♞♞♞♞♞♞♞
  1. foXs
  2. ♞♞♞♞♞♞♞
  3. Join Date: Nov 2009
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 7,709
  6. Rep Power: 38384
Originally Posted By Polaris⏩
Unfortunately, I highly doubt that it will make any difference in the grand scheme of things.
It might not, but it is a good start. You have to give props to the guy and his desire to bring balance and highlight government corruption.

We need more people like him.
♞♞♞♞♞♞♞♞♞♞♞♞♞♞♞♞

Chance Favors the Prepared Mind
post 1698647863 03-03-2024, 01:10 AM
-
#7
  1. Maestro
  2. отличнo!
  1. Maestro
  2. отличнo!
  3. Join Date: Oct 2002
  4. Location: New Mexico, United States
  5. Posts: 58,400
  6. Rep Power: 203698
Originally Posted By Weightaholic⏩
Given that current "AI", in a lot of cases just makes **** up out of whole cloth, sure thing Elon.
It only does that when you tell it to make up something from scratch (ex; Write a 5 page paper on the Roman Empire), and even then, that was GPT 3.0. I think the premium 4.0 is much better.

If youre copy+pasting a bill (essentially giving it the source to pull from) it will only pull from that material.
post 1698647983 03-03-2024, 01:16 AM
-
#8
  1. Maestro
  2. отличнo!
  1. Maestro
  2. отличнo!
  3. Join Date: Oct 2002
  4. Location: New Mexico, United States
  5. Posts: 58,400
  6. Rep Power: 203698
Originally Posted By Polaris⏩
Unfortunately, I highly doubt that it will make any difference in the grand scheme of things.
The concept targets a very specific audience. People into politics are usually older (boomers) and may not be tech savvy enough to know how to use grok. On the other hand, you have kids that may use grok everyday, but not give two chits about using it to summarize legislative bills that come from the House floor.
post 1698648353 03-03-2024, 01:43 AM
-
#9
  1. Latinowarrior3
  2. Registered User
  1. Latinowarrior3
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2020
  4. Age: 56
  5. Posts: 2,151
  6. Rep Power: 8182
If it works that would be nice. Wouldn’t make a difference though. Only political people would read the breakdowns and they’d try really hard to show others and eventually give up once they realize how stupid (and fat) most people are.
deadwoodgregg is my grandpa
post 1698648763 03-03-2024, 02:13 AM
-
#10
  1. AlfBundy
  2. Undocumented User
  1. AlfBundy
  2. Undocumented User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2021
  4. Posts: 14,517
  5. Rep Power: 96372
Originally Posted By Derplington⏩
Your typical Republican voter (and misc R&Per) doesn't care about what's in a bill. All they care about is whether Trump says it is good or not.


post 1698650473 03-03-2024, 04:14 AM
-
#11
  1. Polaris
  1. Polaris
  3. Join Date: Feb 2003
  4. Posts: 63,722
  5. Rep Power: 568352
Originally Posted By Latinowarrior3⏩
If it works that would be nice. Wouldn’t make a difference though. Only political peoplewould read the breakdowns and they’d try really hard to show others and eventually give up once they realize how stupid (and fat) most people are.
Yep.
post 1698650633 03-03-2024, 04:24 AM
-
#12
  1. Bodhy
  2. Paddling to New Zealand
  1. Bodhy
  2. Paddling to New Zealand
  3. Join Date: Mar 2020
  4. Posts: 17,326
  5. Rep Power: 0
I dunno. AI is extremely useful for things like coding for obvious reasons, but I think it would still suck the big one when it comes to law. Because law is context-based reasoning. Have you read the debates between AI proponents and their detractors like John Searle, and Hubert Dreyfus etc, OP?


AI is notoriously bad at context-based reasoning. It's a serious and ongoing problem and not much in the way of a solution. Plus, AI in law has just invented citations to case law, made up names of parties, and fact patterns to support their made up assertions.

The key thing, is it doesn'tunderstand.

I wouldn't count on it to do the job of case summary or statute analysis just yet, let alone functioning as a real lawyer.
Back off, Warchild.

Seriously.
post 1698650923 03-03-2024, 04:38 AM
-
#13
  1. Polaris
  1. Polaris
  3. Join Date: Feb 2003
  4. Posts: 63,722
  5. Rep Power: 568352
Originally Posted By Bodhy⏩
I dunno. AI is extremely useful for things like coding for obvious reasons, but I think it would still suck the big one when it comes to law.Because law is context-based reasoning.Have you read the debates between AI proponents and their detractors like John Searle, and Hubert Dreyfus etc, OP?


AI is notoriously bad at context-based reasoning. It's a serious and ongoing problem and not much in the way of a solution. Plus, AI in law has just invented citations to case law, made up names of parties, and fact patterns to support their made up assertions.

The key thing, is it doesn'tunderstand.

I wouldn't count on it to do the job of case summary or statute analysis just yet, let alone functioning as a real lawyer.
Simply giving the Cliff Notes/Summarizing of a Bill doesn't necessarily = serious "analysis" or require a high level of "context based reasoning".

It seems like you're just trying to obfuscate (or, like usual, trying to appear more intelligent than you are).
post 1698651013 03-03-2024, 04:40 AM
-
#14
  1. Bodhy
  2. Paddling to New Zealand
  1. Bodhy
  2. Paddling to New Zealand
  3. Join Date: Mar 2020
  4. Posts: 17,326
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By Polaris⏩
Simply giving the Cliff Notes/Summarizing of a Bill doesn't necessarily = serious "analysis" or require a high level of "context based reasoning".

It seems like you're just trying to obfuscate (or, like usual, trying to appear more intelligent than you are).
No.
Back off, Warchild.

Seriously.
post 1698652043 03-03-2024, 05:25 AM
-
#15
  1. NYPat
  2. Registered User
  1. NYPat
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Dec 2010
  4. Posts: 43,432
  5. Rep Power: 198579
Originally Posted By NitrogenWidget⏩
yep.
you see the usual chit-libs regularly defending bills that don't even do what the dems claim they do.
brb "secure the border" bill. 10% of the bill actually goes towards the border the rest goes to other countries.
chit-libs defend it tooth and nail and pretend it was an actual bill needed to secure our border which is odd because they have made it clear they want our border wide open.

grok is a decent name for an AI though.
i wonder when it summarizes if it lists which earmark belongs to which politician.
Lmao literally every bill has pork. Only people who never paid attention to politics before their orange cult leader conman came to town think these bills aren't normal.

So let me repeat.. the BIPARTISAN border bill IS a BORDER bill. Just because you don't like it (because daddy told you not to) doesn't mean it isn't.
post 1698657783 03-03-2024, 08:52 AM
-
#16
  1. goody1
  2. Registered User
  1. goody1
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Nov 2004
  4. Location: Minnesota, United States
  5. Age: 48
  6. Posts: 10,204
  7. Rep Power: 96536
Originally Posted By NYPat⏩
Lmao literally every bill has pork. Only people who never paid attention to politics before their orange cult leader conman came to town think these bills aren't normal.

So let me repeat.. the BIPARTISAN border bill IS a BORDER bill. Just because you don't like it (because daddy told you not to) doesn't mean it isn't.
How much of said bill goes to protecting our border?
post 1698658433 03-03-2024, 09:06 AM
-
#17
  1. Duckliver
  2. Offal
  1. Duckliver
  2. Offal
  3. Join Date: Jun 2013
  4. Location: Washington, United States
  5. Posts: 32,176
  6. Rep Power: 347469
Originally Posted By NYPat⏩
Lmao literally every bill has pork. Only people who never paid attention to politics before their orange cult leader conman came to town think these bills aren't normal.

So let me repeat.. the BIPARTISAN border bill IS a BORDER bill. Just because you don't like it (because daddy told you not to) doesn't mean it isn't.
The difference is the amount of pork going into it these days because people are numb and don’t care.

When thousand page spending bills get passed quicker then they could be humanly read, it’s a fukking problem and everyone should have questions.

The only time it becomes an issue is close to election season when a party tries for frame it as the other party is wasting money for votes. When they aren’t chasing votes they just all spend cash as freely as they want.

There needs to be a way to hold politicians responsible for the fiduciary duty they have to taxpayers.
post 1698659233 03-03-2024, 09:23 AM
-
#18
  1. leafs43
  2. Registered User
  1. leafs43
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2007
  4. Age: 45
  5. Posts: 45,367
  6. Rep Power: 153657
In before "Elon's AI is racist and antisemitic and a threat to democracy"
post 1698660503 03-03-2024, 09:49 AM
-
#19
  1. goody1
  2. Registered User
  1. goody1
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Nov 2004
  4. Location: Minnesota, United States
  5. Age: 48
  6. Posts: 10,204
  7. Rep Power: 96536
Originally Posted By Duckliver⏩
The difference is the amount of pork going into it these days because people are numb and don’t care.

When thousand page spending bills get passed quicker then they could be humanly read, it’s a fukking problem and everyone should have questions.

The only time it becomes an issue is close to election season when a party tries for frame it as the other party is wasting money for votes. When they aren’t chasing votes they just all spend cash as freely as they want.

There needs to be a way to hold politicians responsible for the fiduciary duty they have to taxpayers.
Well said
post 1698661243 03-03-2024, 10:04 AM
-
#20
  1. BullittEV
  2. Registered User
  1. BullittEV
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Nov 2012
  4. Location: San Diego, California, United States
  5. Age: 40
  6. Posts: 27,652
  7. Rep Power: 261167
In a thread about using AI for good to summarize long-winded, chitty bills and of course the leftists are hostile and screeching about Trump.
USMC 0311
*Ice Hockey/Lacrosse Crew*
*fukkin zeezbrah when pickin up chicks but do one thing to fuk it up/cant sustain after that night crew*
*C7 GS Vette Crew*
post 1698684873 03-03-2024, 07:51 PM
-
#21
  1. InPhase
  2. Registered User
  1. InPhase
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2008
  4. Location: Australia
  5. Age: 45
  6. Posts: 3,673
  7. Rep Power: 94566
Originally Posted By Bodhy⏩
I dunno. AI is extremely useful for things like coding for obvious reasons, but I think it would still suck the big one when it comes to law. Because law is context-based reasoning. Have you read the debates between AI proponents and their detractors like John Searle, and Hubert Dreyfus etc, OP?


AI is notoriously bad at context-based reasoning. It's a serious and ongoing problem and not much in the way of a solution. Plus, AI in law has just invented citations to case law, made up names of parties, and fact patterns to support their made up assertions.

The key thing, is it doesn'tunderstand.

I wouldn't count on it to do the job of case summary or statute analysis just yet, let alone functioning as a real lawyer.
I wouldn't count on you doing a job, or be a functioning human either, you autistic clown.
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts