Forgeties79

6 ms·

91.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
They are the ones who set the market so that’s on them. They are the ones who set what people were willing to tolerate. If it’s not sustainable, then it’s not a good business. They aren’t entitled to existing. Armchair theories on paramoun
92.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
That may be the case but they are getting so aggressive that I am constantly having to reconfirm devices within my own home. Luckily I just run my own server now but we have HBO for free with my cell plan so that’s the ones subscription we
93.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
See this is the rub for me: we only like to “move fast and break things” in this country when there are promises of a lucrative IPO. I’m not saying we need to blitz, but it’s amazing how we always have to exercise extreme caution when talki
94.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
I’m actually familiar with the 31% statistic and a very important wrinkle to that figure is it includes people on disabilities, retired, unemployed but want to be employed, etc. so we really can’t say “1/3rd of Americans live an ok to
95.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
WFH was amazing. I’m now in a hybrid environment and i just want to wfh. It made parenting way, way easier.
96.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
I didn’t answer the first time you asked because it strikes me as somewhat unproductive and frankly whenever people ask questions like this it’s usually bait, but I’ll assume good faith here. I am not an expert on this subject, I am not pro
97.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
That’s a fair point I considered including but it’s easy to get lost in the weeds here so I opted for an overly simplistic description. Ultimately what I am trying to say is the household income now required for many is too high and often u
98.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
We managed to have a society with a significant number of families living on one income for quite some time. 2 incomes shouldn’t be a requirement to keep a roof over a family’s head. The goal shouldn’t be “2 incomes,” it should be “1 income
99.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
I imagine they don’t reject it though. Inconvenient, should be one click, but I also get it on some level even if that’s not how I’d handle it.
100.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
A friendly suggestion: make fewer points in a comment. This is just too much to address at once. I have tried to respond twice now and I just can’t even begin wading through all this, it’s overwhelming
101.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
You can email dang and co and they’ll delete your HN account (maybe even remove your posts? Might be making that up?) they just prefer folks not IIRC.
102.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
What are you offloading to ram (or even CPU)? I’m using a 9080 (not XT) and having trouble with context/token rates
103.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
Also, is a 1960’s test that hasn’t substantively changed a good metric? Maybe it is, I honestly don’t know, but I’d be curious to see the content before assuming it’s a useful benchmark.
104.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
“They’re not as good at violating your civil liberties as you think they are” isn’t very comforting. They are still doing it at scale and i’m not too keen on opening the back door for them myself.
105.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
>I'm a bit skeptical of arguments of the form, "You should not use LLMs without disclosure because LLMs at bad at writing." That’s not the argument. The argument is “LLM’s tend to write the same way all the time regardless
106.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
Absolute legend > it’s worked on every system I’ve tried so far though Still my favorite part of the whole thing. Classic moment of “who among us hasn’t doesn’t this?” lol
107.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
Idk man I get a ton out of gaming and other media. If I say “I’m a cinephile” no one bats an eye, it’s seen as elevated and intellectually stimulating. Your examples reflect more on the gate keeping we do with what’s considered “worthy of o
108.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
> I can see why this would be a sensitive topic for present day Europeans and how the rise of nationalism is a possible threat to the modern day EU. I am not European, I am from the US. I saw this conversation and saw you being weirdly o
109.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
The modern EU was a decades-long journey, heavily informed by the geopolitical realities of constant horrific European wars, that this person has clearly laid out for you. I don’t understand what you’re trying to argue or achieve anymore. T
110.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
> bombshell news article That’s the aspect I’ve had a hard time articulating. Definitely the right comparison. It feels like some huge revelation has been had and it’s so consequential and it’s unbelievable that it’s happening right befo
111.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
If something is obvious then by definition it’s obvious. Additionally the formula is simple: AI + effort = writing we can generally tolerate (unless you’re just a bad writer). AI + no effort = writing most people can’t tolerate regardless
112.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
>to use an LLM to write is to void the social contract between writer and reader: we readers shouldn’t be expected to labor to understand a sentence that the writer themselves didn’t work to create. Pretty much sums up the issue re: work
113.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
This is very handwavy and dismissive. It is pretty safe to assume that must of us catch it most of the time because the simple fact is so many people just copy and paste whatever the LLM outputs without even trying to edit it or mask that t
114.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
I didn’t get that from their comment at all
115.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
I’m curious what you mean by this. At face value it seems like a weird rationalization but I get the sense I’m not reading this correctly.
116.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
> You're trying to back into a position that you read in some article and trying to come off as just an impartial judge who cares about procedure and rule of law. Excuse me? I was answering the question, I didn’t say anything beyond
117.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
The cuts can be illegal if one doesn’t have the authority to cut it and/or violates the procedures required.
118.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
“It doesn’t count because I don’t include it”? AGI doesn’t have a clear definition, there’s no consensus here, so that’s just not convincing to me. I am not going to call something “intelligent” when it can’t sustain a basic conversation.
119.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
Do you descend into repetitive, incoherent babble after a 30min, incredibly focused conversation? Does any human being without some sort of diagnosis? I assume you regularly have conversations that last more than 30 minutes (work meeting, f
120.
by Forgeties79 1mo ago
We are nowhere near AGI. They all talk the same, they can’t help but try to please and affirm us, and if you engage them for too long they become incoherent. They are facsimile machines. They are xeroxing language - but not even, because w

More ›