• Sam_Bass@lemmy.ml
    0·
    2 months ago

    Wouldnt that be the same as using a multicore modeller computer, since AI is just semi randomizing code?

      • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
        0·
        2 months ago

        I can suggest an equation that has the potential to impact the future:

        H|ψ> = E|ψ> + AI

        Here, I have chosen the time-independent Schrödinger equation, to symbolize the fact that AI is the most important innovation of all time.

        …

        This is all bullshit of course. Everyone knows that the AI term should be included in the Hamiltonian anyway 🙄

        • humbletightband@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          0·
          2 months ago

          This doesn’t look right since you’ve written the equation for very slow movement (sub-relativistic) and including the AI term should increase all the velocities in your ensemble exponentially.

    • Achyu@lemmy.sdf.org
      0·
      2 months ago

      I’ve heard about an extended version of the equation:
      E2 = m2c4 + p2c2
      Or E = (m2c4 + p2c2)1/2

      If so, AI = (m2c4 + p2c2)1/2 - mc2

      I may have the capabilities to be a technology management consultant

    • InputZero@lemmy.ml
      0·
      2 months ago

      Obviously the statement is obsurd. If you wanted to get super pedantic, if we let AI =√P*C and rearrange to get rid of the square root then we arrive Einstein’s full equation. E2 = (MC2 )2 + PC2. Where P is equal to the momentum of the object. Then AI is just a symbol for the energy stored in momentum. So they’re technically correct, which as we all know is the most important type of correct.

      • Technus@lemmy.zip
        0·
        2 months ago

        (MC^2 + C√P)^2 wouldn’t give you that result though, because you have to FOIL.

        Instead you’d get M^(2) C^4 + 2MC^(3)√P + PC^2

        And that’s not even the correct formula. It’s

        E^2 = (mc(2))2 + (pc)^2

        You can’t just naively apply a square root unless one of the terms is vanishing (momentum for a stationary mass, giving E = mc^2, or rest mass for a massless particle, giving E = pc = hf).

        The way to remember this is that it’s equivalent to the Pythagorean theorem, A^2 + B^2 = C^(2).

        So it in fact only makes sense if AI = 0.

        • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          0·
          2 months ago

          In my experience, when E=mc² is written, physicists generally mean relativistic mass, making the formula extract, whereas m_0 is used for rest mass, as seen in the expansion E = m_0c² + m_0v²/2 + O(v⁴)

          • Technus@lemmy.zip
            0·
            2 months ago

            Where does that expansion come from? As far as I can tell, m0v^(2)/2 only gives you the kinetic energy of the object where v << c, in which case the difference between relativistic mass and rest mass is negligible?

            And where does the O(v^4) term come from?

    • SavedKriss@lemmy.world
      0·
      2 months ago

      TedX talk? More like:

      Step right up, folks, and witness the magnificent medicinal miracle of Simpson and Son’s patented revitalizing tonic. [deep breath] Put some ardor in your larder with our energizing, moisturizing, tantalizing, romanticizing, surprising, her-prizing, revitalizing tonic.

    • thefartographer@lemm.ee
      0·
      2 months ago

      I paid to watch it! Hey, wait a second… Do you think Mr. XTalk could be just trying to take our money while building a disinformation platform of unchecked greed?

    • Logh@lemmy.ml
      0·
      2 months ago

      I always found the difference between general and special whativity fascinating.

  • toastal@lemmy.mlEnglish
    0·
    2 months ago

    LinkedIn is just another Microsoft-owned account you should just delete for your sanity

        • lol_idk@lemmy.ml
          0·
          2 months ago

          Ok sure. I’ll endeavor to be more perfectly critical of people if that pleases you.

      • velox_vulnus@lemmy.mlEnglish
        0·
        2 months ago

        I am Indian myself, so I have a better understanding about the internet sub-culture intrinsic to my country. This is a neutral stereotype about ‘WhatsApp Unkils’. It is a counter-reaction to ageism towards younger people, whose intelligence is mocked, simply because they’re younger - the Asian culture of “elders are always right” snubs Gen-Y, Z and younger folks. Now that internet has blown up in India, old people who are literate and take pride in this sort of elitism are embarrassing themselves with their “confidently incorrect” takes on the internet.

        • Deckname@discuss.tchncs.de
          0·
          2 months ago

          Basically the same is happening to boomers, e. g. in Europe, too. Also ageism is happening here too. I don’t know, how much worse it is over on your part of the planet, but here you’re also not taken seriously when you’re young

  • onlooker@lemmy.ml
    0·
    2 months ago

    I like how the OP’s name was censored for their privacy, but not the name of the person responding. Also, what the hell are these people huffing?

    • AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      It really reads like it was written by AI. I’ve never been to linkedin, maybe everyone talks like that there but it really sounds like it was written by ChatGPT