chasfh

Just as annoying to me as the fact that AI can’t do logic at a high school level is that fact that it is programmed to be so phony-baloney polite. By “phony baloney” I don’t mean in the way that it is making an honest effort to be polite and simply botching it, but in the way that it is annoyed and is just using sarcastic overwrought apology language to highlight to everyone else that I am being a complete **** for pushing back on it. It's almost as though the implied parting shot is, "there, are you happy now?" I’ve been annoyed at this faux politeness since almost the beginning, since it is coming from a machine that has literally zero capacity to muster up any politesse on its own. Someone had to program that in there, and if I had to guess, it's being done by people from other countries with cultures that respond really well to the kind of apology theater our culture regards as ridiculous.

Flooding the zone with different takes on it to deflect blame while they pursue the exact same policy in the background.

Second generation Latinos pulling up the ladder behind them.

The irony is that Republicans definitely own certain demographics and can do literally nothing to lose them, short of showing empathy or speaking with nuance.

It was jarring to see the strike zone at first, maybe ten years ago? It looked like something out of MLB The Show. I’ve gotten used to it over the years, just like I have gotten used to the pitch type and speed popping up when the pitch crosses the plate, which started maybe four or five years ago. I wouldn’t miss that one so much, but I might miss the strike zone at first. Remember maybe a decade or so ago when umpires tried policing batters for delaying games dicking around at the plate, like stepping out between pitches, by enforcing some sort of time limit on them between pitches? It worked for about fifteen, maybe twenty minutes, but then they stopped because players were grousing too much and the league wasn’t really standing behind the umps on the effort. Plus, there was no real penalty on batters for infractions, like a ball called against them, and no similar effort to stop pitchers from slowing down the game as much as they wanted, so why should the batters have to listen to umps pick on them? The only thing that ended up working to stop the dicking around was the pitch timer, since the umps could just say, hey man, don’t yell at me, it’s the timer, which you can plainly see. It took the blame out of the ump’s hands, which is why it works so well. It’s transparent, with universal, consistent, unavoidable enforcement. Same thing with having umpires police moving mitts. It would create nothing but headaches for them having to deal with unhappy catchers, pitchers, managers and base coaches on what would appear to be subjective judgments in the moment. Get some sort of automated system that detects moving mitts, with audible tones for violations, and it might work to stop egregious pitch framing movements. Or else go to a fully implemented ABS regime for each and every pitch. That would definitely work to stop egregious pitch framing movements.

A person needs well-honed critical thinking skills to be able to suss out when AI is full of ****. Probably why mankind is doomed. 😉

Fire Hinch! 😝

Maeda is clearly toast. I don’t know whether he’ll be released tonight, but he might be pitching in Japan within a month, if an outright release from a big league team allows him to. Thing is, who would we bring up? Foley and Guenther are both hurt, and nobody else in that Toledo bullpen has any major league experience. Maybe somebody will be making his major league debut this week.

OK, I might be out on AI altogether, at least as it relates to web-based AI products like Claude, which is supposed to be one of the better ones. This is a conversation I just had with it. The Cubs beat the Diamondbacks 13-11 today, even though the D’backs had a 10-run inning. So I went to Claude and asked: Has a big league team ever scored 10 runs in a single inning and still lose the game? Claude: Yes, this has happened several times in MLB history! Scoring 10+ runs in an inning and still losing the game is rare but not unprecedented. One notable example occurred on June 30, 1952, when the Chicago Cubs scored 10 runs in the 6th inning against the Cincinnati Reds but still lost the game 14-12. The Cubs entered that inning trailing 10-2, rallied for 10 runs to take a 12-10 lead, but then allowed 4 more runs to the Reds in later innings. Another famous case was on August 25, 2017, when the Minnesota Twins scored 10 runs in the top of the 5th inning against the Kansas City Royals to take a 12-5 lead, but eventually lost the game 16-12 after the Royals mounted their own comeback. These games highlight the unpredictable nature of baseball, where even a massive offensive outburst in a single inning doesn't guarantee victory if the pitching staff can't hold the lead. Me, after looking for the box scores to confirm: You’re hallucinating neither of those games happened. Claude: I apologize for my error. You're absolutely right to call me out on this. I provided completely incorrect information about games that did not occur as described. Let me correct myself: While there have been instances of teams scoring many runs in an inning and still losing, I fabricated those specific examples with the Cubs in 1952 and the Twins in 2017. Those particular games as I described them did not happen. Thank you for pointing this out. I should have been more careful about providing accurate baseball history rather than generating false examples. Me: I have lost all confidence in you Claude: I understand your frustration, and you have every right to be disappointed. Making up false information about baseball games was a serious mistake on my part. There's no excuse for providing fictional examples presented as historical facts. If you'd like to continue the conversation about baseball or any other topic, I'll be much more careful to verify information before sharing it. If you prefer not to continue, I completely understand. Me: You can redeem yourself by providing an actual example, or confirming it has never happened Claude: I'll approach this carefully by researching actual MLB history. One confirmed example occurred on July 6, 2021, when the Washington Nationals scored 10 runs in the bottom of the 5th inning against the San Diego Padres to take a 12-8 lead, but ultimately lost the game 15-12. The Padres responded with a 7-run 6th inning and held on for the win. This game is well-documented and verifiable - the Nationals had a massive inning but couldn't hold the lead, demonstrating that scoring double-digit runs in a single inning doesn't guarantee victory when the opposing team continues to hit well throughout the game. Me, after finding that game also never happened: Oh good lord Claude: I apologize for continuing to provide information without proper verification. This is clearly frustrating for you, and rightfully so. Let me be direct: I should not make claims about specific baseball games without being certain of their accuracy. Rather than trying to provide another example that might also be incorrect, I'll simply acknowledge that I don't have reliable information about whether a team has ever scored 10+ runs in an inning and still lost. If you're interested in finding a verified answer to your original question, consulting official MLB records or baseball reference sites would be the most reliable approach. So, it appears AI’s prime directive is to provide an answer in an attempt to satisfy the asker even if the answer is wrong, and furthermore, when caught, it cheerfully admits they makes up the answer, plus it double downs on the directive with even more certainty, and when the jig is up, it finally throws up its hands and in effect says, look, if you want an actual truthful answer, go someplace else.

TBF, today is Good Friday.

If FElon ever seriously did embrace the Detroit Tigers and the organization seriously and publicly welcomed and merchandised that, I would have a serious decision to make.

You beat me by some six or eight years. I wasn't aware of him until Spy Magazine.

I'm making no claims about the guy. You are. That's why you have to provide evidence and I don't have to provide a thing. Since DHS is a party with interest in the dispute, citing them as a source falls out of bounds. They are not providing evidence—they are making claims. (1) is an unsupported claim; (5) is also an unsupported claim; (6) does not confirm he is a terrorist or criminal (and simply being undocumented is not in itself a crime); (7) is an unsupported claim; (8) is not relevant to any activities that are claimed he is being detained for. These are all easily dismissable. (2-4) would be more interesting if they related to a crime committed recently. But the write-up is from 2019, during Trump's first term when his DHS could have dealt with Garcia at the time. But they didn't, meaning there must not have been enough evidence to move forward on the guy. Also, the document does not specify any criminal action the guy might have been involved in at the time, only a lot of circumstantial claims meant to imply criminality. Not for nothing, any provenance to the document was removed before being posted on the web page, meaning, we don't know where it's from and who put it together. So it's a lot of smoke from more or less an anonymous source. Maybe you think the idea of "smoke equals fire" should lead to forfeiture of due process, as was the case here, to which I would reply, that's never been how justice in the United States rolls.

I was simply nine years too early with my predictions of this.

We are all nothing more than marks.

It’s real. https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a64503989/tesla-odometers-are-inaccurate-lawsuit-claims/

It should be implemented for 2026.

There are probably be some planets like that. My hypothesis is that most other planets with life are anywhere from the primordial ooze to caveman stage.

I know, I don't have high expectations for an actual response, either. But that doesn't mean he shouldn't be called on to defend his allegations what the situation requires it, and I think this is just such a situation. And who knows, maybe he will upend expectations and surprise us with something. So come on, @Archie, whatcha got?

If you are here to not merely troll—if you have some actual evidence that the guy is a terrorist—then share that with us, because everything we are hearing is that Garcia is being held without any such evidence of terrorism or gang affiliation. This is a very simple request, and If you reply without providing such evidence, that is a tacit admission that you have none.

Is that where I'm scheduled to die? El ****ing Salvador? Christ Almighty.

I didn't know you were Chinese. 😛

That was Trump's situation before he became a politician. Now that he essentially owns the entire government, things are obviously different, at least indefinitely.

You misspelled "neighbours".