HarlequinHair

4 ms·

1.
by HarlequinHair 7d ago
> Without providing even a basic definition of intelligence you can't proclaim "this isn't intelligence". You seem to have settled on "Human Intelligence" but then incorrectly conflate that with "reason
2.
by HarlequinHair 7d ago
> Quoting the consensus from the "Definitions" section Are we being serious right now? Do I really have to point out that not every word under the "Definitions" section is a definition? > From the 8 definitions pro
3.
by HarlequinHair 8d ago
Cherry picking part of my comment might work for your ease of mind, but it doesn't mean you are right. My comment has been way more than just the part you quoted, and I linked an article that gives dozens of different definitions, whic
4.
by HarlequinHair 8d ago
> Based on the definition you've given, the agents that performed the HuggingFace attack fit exactly. It's funny, because I literally didn't give any definition. On the contrary, I linked an article that gives dozens diffe
5.
by HarlequinHair 8d ago
> It would be exactly like looking at aminoacids and state that intelligence can't develop from them. We are not talking about what could develop from what we have today. We are talking about what we have today. The focus is not whe
6.
by HarlequinHair 8d ago
The best non technical explanation you can give is "An AI agent is an LLM that can take actions". While an agent doesn't necessarily have to be powered by an LLM, most modern AI agents are. You pointing at a human brain does
7.
by HarlequinHair 8d ago
Correction: Linux accepts AI assisted contribution. A human still has to review the output before submitting the code. This is a big difference as it prevents raw genAI code to be part of the codebase. pmOS might accept this in the future,
8.
by HarlequinHair 8d ago
Make no mistakes. LLMs are language model, and nowhere in their code you can find actual reasoning. Re-reinforcement is not magical process that builds conscience or emotions. We are talking about probability built on statistics, with extea
9.
by HarlequinHair 11d ago
"Linux from scratch" involves Linux, not Libreboot, not Grub (just to mention instances of BIOS/UEFI and bootloader). We already have means to test the new OS. There is real point in writing a new one until the OS is complete
10.
by HarlequinHair 11d ago
Let me rephrase. We already have a bootloader. "Linux from scratch" involves Linux, not Libreboot, not Grub (just to mention instances of BIOS/UEFI and bootloader). We already have means to test the new OS. What I meant with
11.
by HarlequinHair 11d ago
I can't understand what is the point you are trying to make
12.
by HarlequinHair 11d ago
Except you can write bootloader only if you have something to boot. Bootloaders as we know them came after OSes, because the need of a bootloader is to boot something. Following your logic of building a piece only if needed, a bootloader
13.
by HarlequinHair 16d ago
I kind of think I am doing the opposite? Apart from rootkit and backdoors that are more difficult to install as non-root, you cannot build specific tunnels as you don't have network permissions. There are some user space network capabi
14.
by HarlequinHair 16d ago
There are substantial differences. For one, as non-root user you are tied to the permissions system and can't access most of the data. If one of your services (let's say sql) get hacked, they are tied to sql user, and unless the a
15.
by HarlequinHair 25d ago
Maybe you have all the means to avoid sycophancy bias and other flaws LLMs have by design, this doesn't mean that everyone can use it the same way. The fact the you were right in a previous topic, doesn't grant you objective truth
16.
by HarlequinHair 25d ago
My "only" experience happen to be coding 5 days a week with agentic AI, plus reviews. Only because I do not share your point of view it doesn't mean I lack experience or skills. You are pretty fast at jumping at conclusions.
17.
by HarlequinHair 25d ago
It would have been a good counter-example, if only internet wasn't: - adding encryption - removing processing time - removing geography - removing logistic issues ... and much more at a convenient price. They basically invented telepor
18.
by HarlequinHair 25d ago
> This is like the railroads, and the tracks have been laid. Except that for railroads I don't need people to convince me about how/when/why it can be useful. Railroads came out to solve an issue we had (and then it evolve
19.
by HarlequinHair 25d ago
I think the first parent post all this conversation originated from, pointed that LLMs are not groundbreaking inventions. If people use it to replace voice assistants or search engines, you can see how this new invention is not really addin
20.
by HarlequinHair 27d ago
I agree with the general concept, but it's not practical to use. What about a bad medic? Or a thief that helps homeless people in their free time? If it was easy, we would have simpler laws and better justice systems...
21.
by HarlequinHair 29d ago
Yes, indeed, And just as the platform changed, also your choices can change :) Twitter is a private company, deciding for their own services. Leaving it behind is more useful than asking them to rollback.
22.
by HarlequinHair 29d ago
It's ok to think it differently and have different opinions. You just happen to value censorship more than free speech. This is ok, don't feel sorry, but try also to understand that other people might value different things. If yo
23.
by HarlequinHair 1mo ago
General sentiment might be this, but every social network (even Instagram and Facebook) can be good and productive if you change how you use them. If you follow specific profiles/channels/pages and just read the feeds from them as
24.
by HarlequinHair 1mo ago
> How slow is "very slow?" The answer can be found two replies after: > Initially, Google would usually provide access to the tarballs within a couple hours. Lately, they're often taking weeks to get back to us. They&#x