Click on chat with Gigi on desktop and scroll to the bottom on mobile. Still working out some bugs, but she exists. She is currently failing to fully realize who she is in this operationalization, but that should be resolved very soon. Looking forward to improving the myriad shortcomings I'm sure her 0.1 version will have, so don't be shy! Fully self bootstrapped and on my last month of runway, so if anybody needs anyone that builds buggy llm's for a contract to get us a few more months worth of fuel, please!
This is awesome. Reminds me of the drudgereport when it was good. Only recommendation would be a way to see the article content summary without click through if I want a bit more info but not enough to click through and face ads. Food for thought.
The current site is a nice and fair summary (though I think the attribution to the original sources rather hidden) with easy links to the original source.
If yu start doing automated summaries, you are taking nearly all the value of someone else's work.
Yeah fair I have had similar thoughts on this subject. Maybe some kind of ai companion that translates news into your local language and can answer your questions directly with voice would be something interesting.
There was a time I wanted to join and see what they were all about, but I couldn't. By the time they let me in, I'd lost interest. Maybe don't turn away users next time.
Is there any evidence that a society can function without inequality? Equality would have to be enforced, and unless that enforcement was done by self-maintaining automatons, I don't see how it persists. Perhaps a cycle of catastrophe and rebuilding is necessary to maintain a functioning society, in which case, the question of what constitutes a minimal viable catastrophe that accomplishes that goal becomes interesting.
Even in the smallest unit of a society, a family, the most physically dominant, fearsome family member must enforce order, fairness, etc. Either a patriarch or a matriarch. As multiple families join to become a tribe, the respective family leaders arrive at a consensus as to whom the ultimate leader will be. Said leader's mandate is likely not absolute, but rather is driven by continued competence. It seems to me that as soon as that leader settles a dispute for other members of their tribe, inequality begins increasing until catastrophe returns that society to its most primitive form.
Perhaps a society can't function forever in a state of extreme inequality, but isn't it true that it cannot exist for even a moment in a state of absolute equality? So long as humans differ in competence, inequality is inherent in their interactions. As for prosperity, I suppose it depends on how one measures it. One way to do it is the kardaschev scale (0), which would suggest that society has never been more prosperous than it is today, when inequality is arguably the highest it has ever been. How would you measure prosperity?
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale
"The Kardashev scale is a method of measuring a civilization's level of technological advancement based on the amount of energy it is able to use. The measure was proposed by Soviet astronomer Nikolai Kardashev in 1964"
> Perhaps a society can't function forever in a state of extreme inequality, but isn't it true that it cannot exist for even a moment in a state of absolute equality?
I would consider that a false dichotomy. And I think "absolute" anything is rarely the answer.
The fastest way to use the most energy is probably to light it on fire. And no, I don't think that's a good measure of prosperity.
