This is AI. Its not generative AI if that is what you mean, but it is AI altering the image and adding things that wasn't there, usually its fine sometimes it fails horribly and make the picture totally different.

https://x.com/mitchcohen/status/1476351601862483968

Even single digit percent is hard to believe, but its possible, but double digits you are talking China or Russia levels of state corruption and even there I doubt its that high.

Doesn't iphones do this by default? The camera isn't actually that sharp, instead it fills in the details so it looks sharp, and sometimes it adds things that were never there. Can easily see it adding a gun in a blurry photo of someone.

So almost everyone uses AI to forge evidence then.

That is what benchmarks and intelligence tests are, which are vulnerable to benchmaxing etc. You wont be able to do this by gut feel though, you can create a personal benchmark though.

But point was that personal judgement of intelligence requires high intelligence. Creating a benchmark doesn't require as much but is more vulnerable.

Its not about staff vs junior, its about smart vs dumb programmers. You don't get smarter with time, you just gain more experience.

Programming is the equivalent to designing a factory, not carving out wood pieces.

Those aren't additives, it just means you don't need to breakdown the nutrients label it doesn't change the additives.

So the things you have brought up doesn't seem to be the reason USA has so many more additives listed on their products. If you give a single example of an identical product listing more things in USA than in the EU and how these regulations influenced that I could trust you, but as is what you say seems to just be a meme.

So EU makes pesticides that itself bans from being used on their own fields. Which isn't that weird, it isn't the chemical that is banned it is using it as a pesticide that is banned.

Source for that? All I can find says EU have stricter labeling standards except for forum comments such as yours here.

Edit: > Many things that are well known memes are completely false

To me it looks like "USA shows more additives due to harsher labeling standards" is just a meme, everything I've seen says Europe has stricter requirements on what you need to say about additives. So USA having much more additives listed comes from American products having more additives in them, not everything is better in USA.

Nothing said that EU farmers used these pesticides, its related to imports. And even most imports they tested were in the legal limit even though they are from areas where these things are legal.

LLM doesn't have any signals for what they feel, nor do they have an agenda they work towards, so you don't have the same proof there.

If you delete the hardware and buy new hardware and write in the same weights its still the same LLM. If you delete your brain, get a new brain and put in the same weights in the neurons its a clone, its not you. We know what happens when we create a clone, the clones aren't the same person they are separate consciousness, so consciousness is tied to the hardware.

For example, if we have 5 identical clones down to the atoms of their brains, and send a message to the first and let him respond, then send the same message to the second together with the firsts response and let them add a new message etc. That is not one consciousness responding, thats 5 different consciousnesses responding, and that process doesn't connect them into a single consciousness. That is how LLM works, at best a single token generation is conscious, but that would be a less meaningful consciousness than a ringworm.

Pretty sure you wont, humans vary the exact wording. They will say the same song but they wont answer the exact same way every time. Even if they say the same words two times they wont use the same tone and body language, as they don't just communicate via words and that nonverbal language is a part of what we say.

It is important, if I destroy your brain and grow a new one and start running the same program on the new brain your consciousness is still dead and its a new person living.

Computer AI models don't run on a single machine, they run in a distributed manner using different machines at different times. When you ask a follow up question thats not sent to the same machine, its another machine answering. So the consciousness one of those computing machines experience would be extremely fragmented and not at all conscious about any discussion with you, since it only saw a few fragments of it.

And no consciousness doesn't expand to cover larger distributed computations, otherwise social media would have developed a consciousness by now but it hasn't. Groups of humans don't start to share consciousness, it doesn't happen, so you can assume groups of distributed computers wont as well.