One use case could be improving navigation directions. Right now, map apps provide granular, step-by-step instructions that include unnecessary details, such as how to exit your own neighborhood.
AI could provide more human-oriented direction that focus on key landmarks and decisions rather than every minor turn. For example:
"Hop on 80 West, cross the bridge, take Sir Francis Drake onto 101 South, take the Alexander Avenue exit, don't go through the tunnel, and your destination will be on the right."
My holy grail would be Winamp on iPhone: one screen just for the classic player, another for the equalizer, one for the list of tracks, and one for the visualizer.
In the private sector, OKRs and KPIs are used to track performance and provide metrics on whether a company is meeting its goals. Boards review these metrics and decide on additional investments based on thorough cost/benefit analyses.
I imagine it's similar in the public sector, where funding is determined by the needs of the public, political considerations, long-term planning, and so on.
I'm more of a music person partly because my severe hearing loss makes me strain to focus on lyrics, akin to searching for Waldo on a busy page. Even though I've grown to appreciate and learn the lyrics of songs I enjoy, such as "Master of Puppets" or "Bulls on Parade," rap is challenging for me to follow given its lyrics-first nature and my personal firmware limitations. That said, I enjoy creators on Instagram who point out rap's lyrical and musical creativity.
I can relate to this a lot; even though I don't have any hearing loss, I tend to struggle to process lyrics as "words" in real time to the point that when I look up the lyrics to songs I've listened to my whole life, I'll sometimes be surprised with lines I had never understood before. I first discovered this high school when in Spanish class we'd sometimes be given a sheet of lyrics with some missing words and try to fill them in from listening to the song a couple of times (usually as a non-graded activity that would give a few bonus points on the next test if you got it perfect). I found it virtually impossible despite consistently testing quite high even in the portions of exams where we had to listen to audio and answer questions about it, which made me realize that it had less to do with it being a language I lacked full fluency in and more about the fact that it was singing rather than speaking.
On the other hand, I've learned to play several instruments over the years and have a fairly easy time learning songs by ear, so I suspect that part of the issue is that I find it impossible not to focus on the musical parts of singing rather than the linguistic part; if I'm focused on the pitch, rhythm, and tone of the vocals, it's conceivable that it could explain why it's lot harder for me to recognize individual words. It's occurred to me that the reverse issue could also help explain why I've had to put in effort over the years to build up social skills around non-direct communication; a lot of times when someone says one thing but means another, the intent is conveyed in things like rhythm and tone, and I likely find it harder to pick up on those cues due to my entire focus being devoted to understanding the words themselves being spoken rather than how they're being spoken.
Current polls indicate that "[t]wo-thirds of the public, including majorities of Democrats (86%) and independents (67%), support a law guaranteeing a federal right to abortion."
By current polls, I mean the ones showing Trump even or slightly ahead of Biden despite him being directly responsible for Dobbs. If 2/3 of the public wanted abortion rights, Biden would have 2/3 of the popular vote, but he won't get anywhere near that. Hence, most people don't want Roe reinstated. QED.
>If 2/3 of the public wanted abortion rights, Biden would have 2/3 of the popular vote, but he won't get anywhere near that. Hence, most people don't want Roe reinstated. QED.
That isn't the way people work. Or voting. Or polls.
It is the only practical measure of true public opinion. You can also, by extension, infer that roughly 47% of Americans think sexual assault is acceptable and that democracy is undesirable. It may not be what they say or even what they think but it is reflected in what they do.
It isn't practical by any means, it's unnecessarily reductionist, even when one doesn't consider the numerous innate biases involved in polling.
People are multidimensional but American Presidential politics forces them into a binary decision. Yet there are numerous reasons why people who support abortion might not vote for Biden. They may support abortion but not believe Biden is a credible choice to defend abortion rights. They may support abortion but vote against Biden to punish the Democratic Party for their response to Dobbs. They may support abortion but reject the Democratic Party altogether. They may support abortion but find activism at the state level more effective, and find other things like Biden's support for Israel more objectionable. They may support abortion but also support Trump, because pro-choice Republicans do exist, and their only options will be to vote Trump or not vote and all. And most people won't even vote at all.
>It may not be what they say or even what they think but it is reflected in what they do.
No. It may be comfortable to see people in such black and white terms, but the premise that unless one votes for Biden, one doesn't support abortion regardless of what else one says and does, is ... not even wrong levels of wrong.
Yes, this is exactly the problem with our "representative" democracy. For example, one polarizing issue this year may be whether a voter is willing to accept a candidate who acts like a mob boss or not, regardless of any other issue that the candidates are trying to stand on. Worse yet, elected candidates then have difficulty knowing which of the multidimensional issues mattered to their voters because all the information has been lost by the polarizing election system.
I understand that people are complex and can have subtlety and nuance to their personalities but I can only judge them on what they do. If someone kicks me in the shin, there could be 1000 reasons leading to them thinking it was a valid decision but ultimately they still just kicked me in the shin.
I'm sure 0% of Trump voters would tell a pollster they approve of sexual assault but their actions indicate they do.
You are making the mistake that people understand how our government works or are paying much attention at all. I've video of some voters blaming Biden for the overturn of Roe v Wade because it happened during Biden's term. If voters were properly informed across the board Biden, and most democrats, would win in a landslide. There are many active forces, foreign and domestic, which put serious effort and money into deliberately misinforming the populace, because they are incredibly selfish, and care only for their personal gain, regardless of how many are harmed, and to what degree.
Regrettably, SMS campaigning appears to be the new norm, as both major political parties are utilizing it. The calculation seems to be that the advantages outweigh the drawbacks. Therefore, I don't believe a bad actor would utilize it to potentially help their opponent.
From personal experience, while the constant messaging can be irritating, I've learned to reply STOP and move on with my life. it won't deter me from voting. I mean, this tactic is part of broader campaign strategies rather than a reflection of any candidate's merits.
We had a local election back in 2004, where Candidate A unleashed a spam tsunami at text and voice numbers. Enough that it angered enough people to turn the election to Candidate B. (best as we could tell after the fact)
Candidate B, it eventually came out, was the one who was running a sock puppet "Vote for A!" campaign.
The restaurant downstairs, the Sala Gastronómica, is also worth visiting. It's considered another gallery where traditional regional dishes are served up. I tried sautéed escamoles (ant eggs) here for the first time. Tasty!
> but you're not going to be able to do it full time, so the quantity and quality is far lower.
This is totally a market-driven perspective, expecting quantity and quality linked to full-time work.
Not everyone aims to monetize or dedicate themselves full-time to their online interests. Pursuits can be purely for enjoyment. It's okay if they suck sometimes. Not everything must cater to consumer or market demands, though that approach is valid too.
AI could provide more human-oriented direction that focus on key landmarks and decisions rather than every minor turn. For example:
"Hop on 80 West, cross the bridge, take Sir Francis Drake onto 101 South, take the Alexander Avenue exit, don't go through the tunnel, and your destination will be on the right."
reply