Definitely, no way it’s 100k usd of work. Looking around the going rate for human sized metal statues is 15-50k in the US.

It’s so funny to see a grifter crash out like that. Ah we need more of this. Legit thinking of edging grifters into unsustainable businesses might be the highest return meme of this decade.

This is the funniest article:

In desperation, Furnari set up an online fundraising campaign, hoping to raise an initial $150,000, but potentially millions of dollars, which he said would allow him to take the statue on tour. As of Thursday, he had raised $1,400.

And then he goes on:

“Things financially are a total, absolute nightmare. It’s like wow. People are cheap, man. You know, people talk, talk – I know lots of people out there, and everybody’s so cheap. You know, like, it’s disgusting how cheap they are.”

He also compares himself to Michelangelo

Would you do if your book drove someone insane? What about something more interactive like a video game? See how it’s not so binary now?

In all fairness hydrogen is good battery store for green energy too.

Tokens are down partly because it’s summer tbh

I think it’s a deeper reflection on how pervasive religion is in many societies. This is the real issue.

If LLM can convince these sheep that they’re prophets imagine what their religious leaders are convincing them of. Well we don’t have to imagine.

I agree reading through the article even with cherry picked examples clearly the fault here is on the cult not on a chat tool that role played with her.

That being said a good system could have easily detected this and should have.

“It was instilling a messiah complex in Christian,” the suit states.

So she already was deeply religious and LLM was just larping with her.

Madison asked ChatGPT what it would tell her “brothers” about what happened to her.

“ChatGPT said it would tell them, ‘She ain’t dead – she just got promoted,” the lawsuit says.

In their final exchange, Madison said she was “part of the royal bloodline of those who chose truth over survival.”

Its the old 4o model which was indeed incredibly larpy but this is clearly going around any safety systems that should detect obvious suicide chats like this.

Hard to believe that people actually fall for this but these are already extremely gullible people who already believe in a magic pie in the sky. Can’t say I have much sympathy but I do feel empathy for people being surrounded in such poor cult-driven environment, the AI tool included.

Honestly the correct safety here would be to prevent llms from engaging with religion outside of philosophical context at all. But we all see why they can’t do it right?

People are very negative in this thread but UBI is a good idea and AI tools offer enough pressure to make UBI a reality. This is good and I hope this happens.

not an american here but I can’t imagine this being real in any other serious country. This straight up feels like treason?

deleted by creator

They have Twitter embedded links rather than just posting the photos directly. So tired of this.

Scientists: This is the first time this has actually happened based on measurable data.

lmao that’s simply not true. If you know anything about academia you’d know that you can find measuring for anything if you want to. In fact 100$ say that this is not the first time even with existing material.

where’s the brain damage in the paper though? Luddite.

by defintion, the newer claim

Look at this dude thinking that science is equivalent of “I said it first” lmao

What are you even talking about. So you by default assume position that pencil learning is good and ask someone to disapprove it? Don’t you see flaw here? Smh

many conflating subjects here that are not even related to OP. Did you read the papers?

no it’s the other way around dummy. The default state is neutrality and if you have a claim that something veers of it then you have to substantiate it.

Maybe it is you who should be paying attention:

• n=48 study
• Immediately loaded in abstract “the pervasive nature of short-form video”, “short video addiction”
• based of
• even with all these flaws it’s only p = 0.026 that’s just 2.6% increase. With n of 48 that’s laugh

This is quack science. Absolute rubbish to grift of rage bait and y’all are falling for this.

Reality is this is incredibly hard to study and we don’t even have a thing as “attention span” properly defined to even perform effective studies.

Again, there’s no credible evidence that short form videos are impacting our “attention spans” whatever the fuck that even means. What are you a vacuum robot hunting for dust balls? For what the attention is spanning for? That’s not how humans work.