Wouldnt that be the same as using a multicore modeller computer, since AI is just semi randomizing code?
It wouldn’t be the same if he multiplied by ψ+ signifying that we are moving towards quantum future
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 🙄
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.
deleted by creator
AI+8k+5G
We need a = sign sonewhere, right?
Nope, none of this is math.
For aesthetics n ‘legitimacy’?
He should have let an AI proofread this…
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
Ha! “Consultant / Technology Manager” – pretty sure he’s just working on the next buzzword buffet to justify his bloated comp package.
Oh well, gives me an excuse to link this Weird Al song that makes far more sense.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Both terms are linked by a blockchain.
they did the meth right
As I said in another thread where this was posted, that original post has the distinctive voice of ChatGPT. Could be another similar model, but I’d bet money that was written by an LLM.
yeah it reads exactly like something chatgpt would write
How did it lose so much quality since it was posted just a week or two ago?
Yes it’s not https
The ways of compression artifacts are mysterious.
😆
This reads like a post written by AI as well lol
Reading this is an actual cognitive hazard.
Let me guess, some Indian boomer? They come up with the wildest shit.
Sounds like some
bullshit artistmotivational speakerProbably an AI expert too
And a Bitcoin Scholar
Bitcoiners are old-school, serious people. They highly dislike such bullshit as they have seen the entire “crypto” shitshow, and the AI bullshit is similar in many ways
WTF does Indian have to do with anything?
deleted by creator
So you feel this is perhaps racist but no concern for it also being perhaps ageist?
Ok sure. I’ll endeavor to be more perfectly critical of people if that pleases you.
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.
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
AI = 0 □
deleted by creator
(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.
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)
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?
This really seemed like a good simplification until you threw in that d’Alembert operator at the end
Thanks for listening to my TedX talk, which I paid to present.
deleted by creator
Honestly I had too many people insist that Tedx has any value
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?
!linkedinlunatics@sh.itjust.works back at it again with some more AI bs.
Ist there actually an upcomming alternative for Job profiles and stuff?
Critical support for struggling academics trying to grift some brainless tech bro billionaire out of his money
Oops my bad I mess read who’s the phd and who’s the sentient clipart
