I’m going to be the “um, akchually” person:
Lunar calendars, like the Chinese and Jewish ones, have leap months for the same reason the Gregorian calendar has leap days: to keep our seasons in line. It’s an entire, extra doubled-up month. However, one would say that year has 13 months, not 12. (At least for the Chinese calendar, not sure about the Jewish one.)
Speech-to-text (a type of AI) has been around for a fair good years, but now they’re being paired with generative AI. This is the kind of thing that shouldn’t be paired with a generative LLM. A language model to identify words? Yes. Generative? No.
I understand where you’re coming from, and it wouldn’t apply in this specific context (where locals had rejected the poor boy), but in a general sense, the idea is to partner or invest in such a way to enable locals to lead the change efforts, or at least have a significant stake and voice.
In the business world, there are often silent investors who back entrepreneurs. Their financial input make a business possible, but leave the operations to the entrepreneur. The investor backs the entrepreneur, and they both profit.
It’s a different model and it takes more time and effort to find local partners to build up their capacity over time, but enabling locals will get stronger long-term results for the recipients of charity. It’s the difference between providing food packages to people and giving people agricultural tools to provide food for themselves in the long run. Obviously, in a situation of dire need, providing food is an immediate need, but only providing food instead of also providing tools keeps the recipients in a dependent situation. If they’re dependent on foreign charity forever, it’s just another form of control and colonialism.
What this woman had done, by caring for this poor boy, was long-term investing in him. Now he has an education and will be able to work and care for himself.
Thanks for articulating it this way for me. It’s the hypocrisy that gets me, at least in my situation. I reported my boss to the directors. He was (still is) planning to cut a guy from our team, claiming he costs too much. But when I did the math, I found that my boss’ personal expenses on food, gas, phone, vehicle, etc. (with increasingly unaccounted-for amounts) are more than that guy’s pay.
My boss isn’t worried about the financial health of the organization, he’s worried he won’t be able to keep spending it on himself if he has to pay the workers.
Truly, I don’t understand why, but there are fully grown adults who believe that anything an LLM says is true. Maybe they think computers are unbiased (which is only as true as programmers and data are unbiased); maybe its the confidence with which LLMs deliver information; maybe they believe the program actually searches and verified information; maybe it’s all of the above and more.
I know a guy who routinely says, “I asked ChatGPT…”, and even after having explained how LLMs are complex word predictors and are not programmed for factual truth, he still goes to ChatGPT for everything. It’s a total refusal to believe otherwise, but I can’t fathom why.
I wanted to change careers to something totally different and took a course and found the maths beyond my capability to understand. That was when I found my ceiling. And you know what? That’s okay. I tried, and now I know I can’t do it. I won’t live the rest of my life wondering “what if” or regretting that I didn’t go for it. Instead, I changed directions and I’m about to (hopefully) graduate from a different masters.
In a similar vein, during my undergrad, I took one single class in 3D animation. Up until that point, I thought I would love it. Turns out I HATED it. I could do it, but I hated it. I’m glad I took that class, otherwise (again), I may have spend the rest of my life thinking about this ideal career and regretting not going for it. Instead, I’m so relieved that I never had to do it again.