正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

This isn’t a glitch. Engagement-driven algorithms don’t understand meaning, context, or childhood development. They only understand clicks and watch time driven by dopamine spikes. So when AI is tasked with churning out videos at scale, it doesn’t filter for innocence—it optimizes for stimulation. Cartoon imagery masking adult themes, fear...

67,586 次观看 • 6 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

#WATCH | Delhi: At the Synergia Conclave, Lieutenant General Vipul Shinghal, AVSM, SM, Deputy Chief of Integrated Defence Staff (Doctrine, Organisation, and Training), says, "...Even when I operate an AI system, I understand how to use it, but I don’t know what manipulation of data is happening... Where we have control and where we are also focusing is that our commanders, who earlier were only dealing with troops and making decisions based on that, are now dealing with algorithms and systems... they must have the ability to question machine outputs... These aspects are being debated worldwide... India itself has recently lost any regulation after the AI summit, and we are part of these discussions. The consensus is hard, but it is building..." He adds, "Meaningful human control is another aspect that is taking shape. Meaningful human control means that commanders must be able to access control meaningfully, and for that, they require 4 inputs or rather 4 levers: sufficient situational awareness... adequate time and information... And the ability to override or intervene... if they understand its limitations, we will be able to, at least in systems of the armed forces and weapons systems, ensure that we use AI for user responsibility. The moral responsibility must remain with the commander, and our conscience must keep that in place... In the Indian context, we have always believed that Shakti must go hand in hand with Dharma, that this force must go hand in hand with righteousness..." (11.03)

ANI

104,382 次观看 • 4 个月前

David Friedberg: The AI Jobs Panic Is a Crock of Sh*t Why? The revenue potential outweighs the cost savings by 100x. “There is no job loss with AI. I've said it a thousand times, and I will say it again, and again, and again. What I see on the ground, and what I've seen at dozens of companies, including my company that I run, there are two sides to a business. There is revenue and there’s costs. On the cost side of the equation, AI can be used to reduce humans doing things that cost money, to some extent. The effect there, I would argue, is nominal. The real opportunity with AI is on the revenue side, where suddenly one engineer can do 100x or 1000x what they used to be able to do, meaning you can make more products at your company, whether those are agricultural seed products, or boats and ships, or software for companies, or clothing, or what have you. Because of AI, everyone has the ability to expand their revenue base to create more products, and that is the foundation of good economic prosperity. It is called productivity. We can grow productivity in this country with AI. So where I see AI being used is on the revenue side 100x more than the cost side. And in that equation, people are hiring like crazy. We cannot hire enough people. I just had a review meeting with my product and engineering team two days ago, and they're like, ‘We want to add an extra 15 headcount to our engineering squads because we have all this opportunity to do stuff that we couldn't otherwise do.’ So we are going to hire more people. And to Sacks' point, we are seeing that show up in the jobs numbers. The idea that AI is going to destroy jobs is a Luddite idea that is being disproven every single day, and I see it on the ground. It is only a matter of time before people wake up to this and they realize that this narrative that they've all been sold is a crock of sh*t.”

The All-In Podcast

151,873 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨 “WE ARE ALREADY IN HARM’S WAY” — EUROPE IS BEING CONDITIONED FOR WAR 🚨 Those words should stop every European cold. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has now said openly what leaders usually hint at in private: “We are Russia’s next target.” This is not casual language. This is psychological preparation. When senior figures start speaking this plainly, it means governments are no longer just planning militarily — they are preparing public consciousness for conflict. And it doesn’t stop there. The UK has now followed suit. Ministers confirm Britain is rapidly developing plans to prepare the entire country for war — not just the armed forces, but society itself. That is a line you do not cross lightly. This rhetoric isn’t accidental. It comes amid mounting pressure on Europe to rearm, to spend more, to accept sacrifice — and to internalise the idea that war is no longer distant, theoretical, or avoidable. This is about conditioning: ▪️ Conditioning populations to fear ▪️ Conditioning economies for militarisation ▪️ Conditioning citizens to accept disruption, loss, and control The most dangerous part isn’t the weapons. It’s the moment people are told — quietly but firmly — that war is no longer if… but when. And once a population is psychologically prepared, the threshold for escalation drops dramatically. Europe is being moved — step by step — into a war footing. The question is no longer whether leaders are preparing. The question is whether the public understands what that preparation truly means — and where it ends.

Jim Ferguson

68,753 次观看 • 7 个月前

Jack Dorsey on becoming a better storyteller: "I found myself very early on thinking about something like thinking about this early idea for Twitter and saying to myself, I could build this awesome. You have those shower-like moments, or you're walking at midnight in some town in New York City, and you've got these amazing brand ideas. And then you start thinking, well, I could really start doing this if only X and if I had this person or if this technology existed or if this happened or this happened. And what I realized was that I was constantly making excuses for not working on it. And then the window had passed, and then I couldn't do anything. So I think it's really, really important to write it out or to draw it out or to code it. But you need to get it out of your head. And the reason you have to get it out of your head is that you need to be able to see it on a surface that is not in your mind. And once you can see it, and once you can step back from it, then you can also decide this passes my filter, my constraints, so maybe I can show it and share it with some other people. And then they will be like that's the stupidest idea ever and or that's somewhat interesting, but maybe this and this and this. So the sooner you can do that, then you have a lot of momentum around it, and you can really decide if you want to commit to it and work on it more or put it on the shelf for a later date. And the realization that I think everyone needs to have about that latter option, putting it on the shelf, is that you can come back to it and it will surface back up in another piece of work or another idea at some point in your life. So having that ability to close off a chapter and move on is really, really important. You can't have all these open threads, and that's what I realized I was doing. And that also encouraged me to really write more and to really think about what's the story? How are people coming to this? And like when I show my friends this, how are they going to react and I would write it down. I would actually treat it like a play. And when I realized that I was writing plays, I read a lot more plays for style and for substance and for technique and I think it's really good. I think there is another company that I have always looked towards for inspiration and I know a number of people in this room probably have a similar company in mind, which is Apple. Apple, I think, is run like a theater company. It has a great sense of pacing, has a great sense of story and has a great sense of execution and it's all about event-driven, it's all stage-driven, the stage being a billboard or the stage being a keynote or the stage being a product launch. All of it has a very, very cohesive end-to-end story. I mean you think about what happened when Steve Jobs came back to the company. The first thing he did was kill every product line the company was working on. And for two years,rs they had no product on the market whatsoever. All they had were a bunch of posters all around the world with Steve Jobs' heroes, and it said, think different. And it was just focused on bringing up the brand and making people aware of the brand again and how the brand is aligning to this particular feeling and story. And then they came out with the iMac and then built iTunes and then the iPod, and they realized that, wait a minute, people are carrying music on their phones now, so we better build a phone, an iPhone. And so this unfolding of the plot and the epic story has been very, very interesting to watch, especially if you look back to that time when he came back to the company. So I've learned a lot from that company and other companies that operate in a similar fashion."

Founder Mode

107,213 次观看 • 6 个月前