NateEag

11 ms·

151.
by NateEag 9mo ago
Yep - it honestly reads like an LLM's summary, which often miss critical nuances.
152.
by NateEag 9mo ago
> You get to start by dumping your raw unfiltered emotions into the text box and have the AI clean it up for you. Anyone semi-literate can write down what they're feeling. It's sometimes called "journaling". Thinking
153.
by NateEag 9mo ago
I think they do, and you missed some biting, insightful commentary on using LLMs for scientific research.
154.
by NateEag 9mo ago
They're saying that if they completely refused to touch any system that has been touched by AI, they would be unable to find paying work. Thus, they won't use it directly themselves, but are willing to work with people who do.
155.
by NateEag 9mo ago
Qt uses "slow as shit" JavaScript in its UI markup language: https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/qtqml-javascript-expressions.html Is your complaint with Electron, the "browser as local GUI app" framework that&#
156.
by NateEag 10mo ago
As a longtime musician, I fervently believe in doing the best you can with the tools you have. As a programmer with a philosophical bent, I have thought a lot about the implications and ethics of toolmaking. I concluded long before genAI wa
157.
by NateEag 10mo ago
If a year ago nobody knew about LLMs' propensity to encourage poor life choices, up to and including suicide, that's spectacular evidence that these things are being deployed recklessly and egregiously. I personally doubt that _no
158.
by NateEag 10mo ago
My minimalist version has a better domain name: http://endinter.net/
159.
by NateEag 11mo ago
If you were a thoughtful, careful, law-abiding business, yes. I submit the evidence suggests the genAI companies have none of those attributes.
160.
by NateEag 11mo ago
If he (or his employees) are actually exploring genuinely new, promising approaches to AGI, keeping them secret helps avoid a breakneck arms race like the one LLM vendors are currently engaged in. Situations like that do not increase all pa
161.
by NateEag 11mo ago
"Befehl ist befehl." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders
162.
by NateEag 1y ago
> This is causal evidence and already beyond all statistical thresholds as they can trigger this at will. Their post says: > Even using our best injection protocol, Claude Opus 4.1 only demonstrated this kind of awareness about 20% of
163.
by NateEag 1y ago
> Anyone who says or pretends to know it is or isn’t a dead end doesn’t know what they are talking about and are acting on a belief akin to religion. > It’s clearly not a stochastic parrot now that we know it introspects. That is now
164.
by NateEag 1y ago
You're welcome. I'm glad I was able to clarify it. It's not the first time I've made such a clarification - it's a very human impulse to defend your belief system from unjust attacks that aren't actually there.
165.
by NateEag 1y ago
A good point. Thank you. The violence, once enacted, is an objective fact. The threat of violence is still there only due to the collective subjective agreement that countries exist. The IRS would have no functional power if Washington, D.C
166.
by NateEag 1y ago
Money is subjective. Like countries, it exists only in people's minds. Its value comes from agreement by a large number of humans that it is valuable. A stack of Benjamins would be nigh-valueless to people from 9th-century China.
167.
by NateEag 1y ago
> Atheism doesn't presuppose either hedonism or nihilism. And if the GP thought it did, he would not have bothered to qualify it with those labels. Since they _did_ specify "atheistic hedonism/nihilism," we know they&
168.
by NateEag 1y ago
Fascinating - Jansson's artwork is lovely. Thank you for sharing it! I think the huge Gollum is a very understandable misinterpretation, but I think it's likely false the text she worked from was ambiguous about Gollum's size
169.
by NateEag 2y ago
This illustrates beautifully how stupid labeling ideas stupid is. To know that that an idea or approach is fundamentally stupid and unsalvageable requires a grasp of the world that humans may simply not have access to. It seems unthinkably
170.
by NateEag 2y ago
I prefer the version that says "There are enough pieces of the true cross to build Noah's Ark."
171.
by NateEag 2y ago
Has it passed the Turing Test? Keep in mind that the actual test is adversarial - a human is simultaneously chatting via text with a human and a program, knowing that one of them is not human, and trying to divine which is an artificial mac
172.
by NateEag 2y ago
And all that is kind of irrelevant, because if LLMs were human-level general intelligence, they would solve all these questions correctly without blinking. But they don't. Not even the best ones.
173.
by NateEag 2y ago
The problem is that there are no tasks that LLMs are reliably good at. I believe that's what OP is getting at. I fixed a production issue earlier this year that turned out to be a naive infinite loop - it was trying to load all data
174.
by NateEag 2y ago
Why does religious belief require a disclaimer? Do other philosophical positions, like atheism or panpsychism?
175.
by NateEag 2y ago
In my experience, people often conflate forgiveness, reconciliation, and redemption. They are distinct things. People also often do not understand the role repentance plays (evangelical Christians are _especially_ prone to miss it entirely)
176.
by NateEag 2y ago
> Go back a few decades and you'd see articles like this about CPU manufacturers struggling to improve processor speeds and questioning if Moore's Law was dead. Obviously those concerns were way overblown. Am I missing somethin
177.
by NateEag 2y ago
P-hack badly-constructed datasets until they find a coincidence in a dataset that reinforces their preferred narrative. I mean, no, not all of them do that all of the time. But it seems to be pretty common, and I'm not at all convinced
178.
by NateEag 2y ago
Maybe, but only if computers survive in a usable form. If they don't, digital storage is utterly worthless.
179.
by NateEag 2y ago
> we do know that a calculator doesn't think or have awareness in the way we consider ourselves to. If only this were true. Some people take panpsychism seriously, and while it may sound ludicrous at first blush, it isn't actua
180.
by NateEag 2y ago
> Empirically assessing the result after the fact is how we determine intelligence and reasoning in.. anything humans included. It isn't, though. At least not exclusively, I'd argue not even primarily. We look instead at how so

More ›