this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2026
829 points (96.5% liked)
memes
22491 readers
2330 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Agree. And also. Scientists have been using and running statistical software analysis since like the late 70s. Everyone acts like we don't have tried and true methods already.
Some machine learning might be useful though in research but idk if it's fair to call it "ai". Idk it depends on your definition.
Actually in the research I do, I was looking into papers that measured a lot more variables than what is commonly done. (Usually two things are compared) And the authors used a formula to determine interactive effects based on which factors aligned or didn't align and by how much.
This type of statistics is close to how ai works as it gives "weights" to different inputs.
But this was a method the authors came up with and they fully disclosed how it worked and acknowledged it was only one of many approaches to determining these interactive effects.
The research I'm referring to was about vision. Accommodation and vergence. Which function together. And you can manipulate them so they don't match and see which one has a stronger influence on the perception of depth. However, many other factors effect depth perception. But it's nearly impossible to study how these each contribute when multiples other factors are present. Some matching the true depth. Some giving an incorrect cue. Which cue, when wrong, overrides the correct one? If two matching cure are present, is there one cue that's wrong, but has a stronger impact on the perception ?
These things are difficult to determine without literally thousands of studies.
The complete lack of a moral compass and legal ramifications displayed so far by the techbros might give them a very small advantage. But that shit always ends up being nothing more then useless torture in the end with little in the way of results.
Absolutely.
The thing a lot of people don't understand about unethical science is that it's almost always shit science to boot.
For example I hear people say that "sure, what the Nazis scientist did to Jews was awful but we learned so much".
No we didn't.
The only thing that research was good for was determining how long it took for a starved stressed person to die from a specific infliction like hypothermia. Or having limbs cut off. Or having poisons injected into them.
That's literally the only thing gained and because the test subjects themselves were already in poor condition, we can't even use that information to determine, for instance, how long a healthy person could survive with said inflictions.
Their shit ethics is also shit science.
It's worthless.
All those Nazi scientist who got a free get-out-of-jail card and set up in the U.S were shit scientist. They never gave the world anything useful.
Much like the research musk's neurolink does.
They dont get published papers because it's unethical and shit science.
Nothing useful comes from mass maiming and torturing of animals. Neurolink.... I don't even want to get into why it has so many methodology flaws. But it's not being done properly.
Shit ethics is always shit science too.
People think letting these tech bros cross ethical restrictions will result in faster tech advances, they are sorely mistaken.
machine learning is by definition a form of AI