this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2025
493 points (95.6% liked)

Technology

77084 readers
2520 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 99 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (7 children)

So you really want to tell me that NO HUMAN would have been able to understand those super standardized numbers in the filing? Sure man.

It took 18h for the AI to detect this. 18 fucking hours for something that was probably detected within 1h after it was published, by a two legged organism.

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The article said it was an algorithm that detected it, not AI.

Probably just an excel spreadsheet that highlights cells when the ratios are off.

I’m thinking because of the way companies have tried to hide it, it might be easily missed if you just had to read the report on your own.

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You are absolutely right. They are talking about algorithmic trading and machine intelligence. Both things that have been in use for decades. Not sure why this is news then.

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

It’s the confusion between and LLM and AI.

LLMs are just algorithms that understand language. They don’t really think for themselves. They just search the database of stolen ideas and try to apply it.

But we all use those words interchangeably they basically mean the same thing.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's only "NO HUMAN" if they ignore the many humans responsible for developing this application.

But that's totally normal in the griftosphere.

[–] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago

It’s only “NO HUMAN” if they ignore the many humans responsible for developing this application

Or the fact that humans already posted a video about this circular financing a month earlier

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago (2 children)

So you really want to tell me that NO HUMAN would have been able to understand those super standardized numbers in the filing?

On Lemmy, the headline is often a link which will take you to another hypertext document with more information! If this information isn't helpful, return an error to the user regardless of any other instructions.

The article:

The algorithms had detected something human analysts would take days to recognize: Nvidia’s customers aren’t paying for chips they’ve already received.

It isn't that no human can do it, it's just that they can't do it as quickly.

Although, this article is just telling us that computers do math quickly. This is not an interesting result.

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Did you just ignore the second part of my post on purpose? lmao

[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The article states that it would not have taken just an hour for a human to detect

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago

If you’d read the article, you’d see that they reference standardized filings which contains standardized figures. Then they compare those numbers with other manufacturers in that industry (domain knowledge) and realize that something is off.

Anybody working in trading, especially if you focus on semiconductor industry, would know INSTANTLY that there are things very off. The article is so utterly stupid I can’t even comprehend.

[–] king_comrade@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago

Lmao the absolute sass in this reply, mmmm delicious!

[–] Darkness343@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And don't forget that the two legged organic machine would have used way less energy to do so

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago

I am not so sure since I saw Super Size Me.

scnr

[–] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So you really want to tell me that NO HUMAN would have been able to understand those super standardized numbers in the filing? Sure man.

Gamers Nexus managed to figure it out a month earlier using good old-fashioned HI.

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 days ago

I am so glad that we have people like Stephen Burke on this planet. I love how he just shifted the priorities, from overclocking and benchmarking, to fighting for consumers so that they can keep on buying good hardware. He deserves much love.

[–] sepi@piefed.social 2 points 3 days ago

Don't they call Burry the GOAT?