EternalFury

7 ms·

31.
by EternalFury 2y ago
Not at all at first. More and more since the pandemic.
32.
by EternalFury 2y ago
Your estimate is dead on. My first was born in 2005 and my second in 2009. Social media and the early sexualization it brought were a problem for sure. But pretty much every interaction with these devices is messing with dopamine regulation
33.
by EternalFury 2y ago
Here is an example of reductionism leading to crazy results. Nauru is 11th on that list. That country is known for 3 things: 1) 90% of the population is either overweight or obese, 2) > 50% of the population smokes, 3) in the 70’s and 80
34.
by EternalFury 2y ago
With LLMs, the richer, the smarter the questions, the smarter the responses. In fact, the big labs should post-train their models to extract as much information from questioners about their questions before attempting to answer them. These
35.
by EternalFury 2y ago
My kids are phone drones. I failed to prevent it. I’ll never forgive myself.
36.
by EternalFury 2y ago
You can look at it this way. Or, you can see it as raising the bar for new entrants. If a new programming language has sufficient merits to overcome a poor level of AI assistance, then nothing will stop it, at least in some circles. But, if
37.
by EternalFury 2y ago
The Web is dead. It’s pretty clear future web pages, if we call them that, will be assembled on-the-fly by AI based your user profile and declared goals, interests and requests.
38.
by EternalFury 2y ago
I should have explained my reasoning. AI coding assistants are closing the door. They need a lot of training data to be good and useful. Established programming languages have a tremendous amount of that, so AI coding agents will do a good
39.
by EternalFury 2y ago
Think of Google as of a tanker ship. It takes a while to change course, but it has great momentum. Sundar just needs to make sure the course is right.
40.
by EternalFury 2y ago
The door for new languages is rapidly closing; unless you are a craftsman and dilettante.
41.
by EternalFury 2y ago
I have been an open source contributor since age 24. I am now 53. I have seen tremendous contributors get nothing in return except the satisfaction of having helped build something of value (which is huge, mind you). I have seen opportunist
42.
by EternalFury 2y ago
I get that. But, let’s say you have a glass, you fill it to one third, then to half, then to three quarter, then to full. Can you expect to fill it beyond full? Not every process has an infinite ramp. It seems frontier labs have been throwi
43.
by EternalFury 2y ago
Many people say: > these things will get bigger and better much faster than we can learn to discern I would like to ask “Why?” Clearly, these models are just one case of “NN can learn to map anything from one domain to another” and with
44.
by EternalFury 2y ago
A poor use of the words for sure. “standard originator” would have been better.
45.
by EternalFury 2y ago
I trained an agent that operates as a McKinsey consultant. Its system prompt is a souped up version of: “Answer all requests by inventorying all the ways the requestor should increase revenue and decrease expenses.”
46.
by EternalFury 2y ago
I give o1 a URL and I ask it to comment on how well the corresponding web page markets a service to an audience I define in clear detail. o1 generates a couple of pages of comments before admitting it didn’t access the web page and entirely
47.
by EternalFury 2y ago
If RFCs were RFCs, it would be easier. But in history, RFCs became loose or strict standards. From that day on, everyone has tried have to their own RFC stamped; because there’s an economic advantage to being the standard bearer. So, the pr
48.
by EternalFury 2y ago
You must have found a way to add more components, actions, properties, etc. automatically when your data models change. Otherwise, you are changing your UI every time those change. Except that now you have to maintain DTOs, models, actions
49.
by EternalFury 2y ago
I wonder how much of this is actually cinema. Because I just evaluated o1 and it can’t tie its own shoe laces, let alone get out of its sandbox where it plays with drool all over its face. The marketing stunt seems to be: Portray it as pote
50.
by EternalFury 2y ago
Nothing new to what I am going to say and not strictly related to React 19. I once loved client-side frameworks like React. Then I realized: Great, we managed to add complexity wherever possible. In the backend, in the front-end, in the Dev
51.
by EternalFury 2y ago
Anyone can mix chemicals in a test tube and claim it’s the cure for something. That’s the easy part. Proving it’s safe and effective, that’s what requires a lot of capital expenditure. This statement is a drastic characterization, but you c
52.
by EternalFury 2y ago
I am probably jaded. The way I see it, activisms and politics are occupations of the wealthy. I want to be wrong, but when I observe the political landscape, I find this to be true. I have no interest in being an activist or a politician. I
53.
by EternalFury 2y ago
I’ll check it again in a year. Their “algorithm” is another polarization device, however. If you click or like anything, your feed fills with extremely similar things. Usually, that makes recovery from a closed mindset impossible.
54.
by EternalFury 2y ago
I get what you’re saying. Political banter is a form of that. But it’s an echo chamber and I am tired of that. I would rather be alone in the woods than having to put up with another echo chamber. It’s not for me; it may be for you and appa
55.
by EternalFury 2y ago
I tried it and lasted only 4 days. The platform feels very reactionary, with many users seemingly intent on creating a left-leaning alternative to Truth Social or X. I was searching for an apolitical, more progressive, and intellectual spac
56.
by EternalFury 2y ago
The irony is that this rendered pretty poorly on my phone. Ignore me, though, as I like the idea.
57.
by EternalFury 2y ago
If GPT-5 had passed the A/B testing OpenAI likes to do, it would have been released already. Instead, it seems they are clearly concerned the audience would not find it superior enough to GPT-4. So, the bluff must go on until the right
58.
by EternalFury 2y ago
No one in their right mind will argue neural nets cannot outperform humans at resampling data they have previously been exposed to. So, digital twins and debate, they probably can do better than any human.
59.
by EternalFury 2y ago
If you "know literally nothing about a programming language", there are two key consequences: 1) You cannot determine if the code is idiomatic to that language, and 2) You may miss subtle deficiencies that could cause problems at
60.
by EternalFury 2y ago
The Internet is worth trillions to no one in particular. Just as clean water is worth trillions to no one in particular. Or the air we breathe. You can take an abstract, general category and use it to infer that some specific business will

More ›