ajross

23 ms·

391.
by ajross 8mo ago
Absent any existential debate about religion and faith, this bit of the Sermon on the Mount relies on some pretty profound misunderstandings of biology and ecology. Life really sucks in the wild. By nature, all species expand into their
392.
by ajross 8mo ago
> the obvious question is: Which [of having babies vs. building datacenters] is more worthwhile to us as a species Uh... no, it's not. You're making an argument in the opposite direction as Altman, but recapitulating the same
393.
by ajross 8mo ago
> Has the lack of crypto ever stopped this from happening? Undeniably yes, given the number of fraud and money laundering convictions achieved over the years. > cases of gold bars [...] are actually MUCH less tracable. Laughably false
394.
by ajross 8mo ago
You're the second responder here that appears to think LLMs are "averaging" machines and that they need to be "protected" from wrong info. That's exactly the opposite of the way they work. You feed them the g
395.
by ajross 8mo ago
> what the mathematically average chronically online person knows and thinks about a topic Yes you do, often. Understanding ideas and consensus is part of understanding "topics". To choose a Godwinized existence proof: an LLM
396.
by ajross 8mo ago
> I absolutely do not want an LLM that gives much or any truth-weight to the vast majority of writing on the vast majority of topics. I can think of no better definition of "groupthink" than what you just gave. If you've
397.
by ajross 8mo ago
> In other words, it works. Well, sure, but that's a ridiculous double standard. You're making the claim (or implying it, at least) that FreeBSD is fundamentally superior because it's a unified piece of software shipped a
398.
by ajross 8mo ago
"Groupthink" informed by extremely broad training sets is more conventionally called "consensus", and that's what we want the LLM to reflect. "Groupthink", as the term is used by epistemologically isolat
399.
by ajross 8mo ago
Verifiably false. Like, this is just trivial to disprove with the "Reload" button in the browser (about 1.5s for me, FWIW). Why would you even try to make that claim?
400.
by ajross 8mo ago
> The key thing is that on freebsd you do not risk bricking your system by installing a port What specifically are you trying to cite here? Which package can I install on Debian or Fedora or whatever that "bricks the system"?
401.
by ajross 8mo ago
> all the Xorg politics nonsense Uh... Xorg is packaged by FreeBSD too... Really the whole theme that (from the article) "FreeBSD ships as a complete, coherent OS" is belied by this kind of nonsense. No, it's not. Or, su
402.
by ajross 8mo ago
> Thunderbird is a fully-featured mail app and much more performant than Gmail. TB is great and I use it every day. An argument for it from a performance standpoint is ridiculous on its face. Put 10G of mail in the Inbox and come back
403.
by ajross 8mo ago
> Electron crap application Sigh. Beyond the deeply unserious hyperbole, this is a no-true-scotsman. Yes, you can use native APIs in Electron. They can even help. That's not remotely an argument for not using Electron. > the
404.
by ajross 8mo ago
> complex UI that isn't a frustratingly slow resource hog Maybe you can give ones of competing ones of comparable complexity that are clearly better? Again, I'm just making a point from existence proof. VSCode wiped the floor
405.
by ajross 8mo ago
> a UI that doesn't jank and max out the CPU While there are legitimate/measurable performance and resource issues to discuss regarding Electron, this kind of hyperbole just doesn't help. I mean, look: the most complicated
406.
by ajross 8mo ago
> adrade(?) "adread", meaning afraid Still a recognizable archaic word, constructed from a still-in-use root. Just the spelling is different.
407.
by ajross 8mo ago
> What code can you not write in C? This falls under the "selling somthing" angle I mentioned. Yes yes yes, generality and abstraction are tradeoffs and higher level platforms lack primitives for things the lower levels can do
408.
by ajross 8mo ago
Good grief. 1. That's transparently NOT what the white house said the tariffs were for. 2. There has been NO significant change (via negotiation or not) in non-tariff trade policy under this administration. Essentially all those &
409.
by ajross 8mo ago
That's just bluster. The IEEPA nonsense was already the creative trickery deployed in defense of a novel and prima facia unconstitutional policy. If they had a better argument, they would have made it. And we know in practice that
410.
by ajross 8mo ago
Prices drop all the time. But no, they don't drop "automatically" as some kind of rules thing when regulations change. Prices drop when someone has extra inventory and needs to liquidate, or run a sale, or whatever. Anthrop
411.
by ajross 8mo ago
> Wasn't that a suspected state actor? Against that threat model your best course of action is a prayer and some incense. No? They caught it! But they did so because the software had extensive downstream (!) integration and valida
412.
by ajross 8mo ago
> I mean somebody could make a singular rust dependency that re-packages all of the language team's packages. That's not the requirement though! Curation isn't about packaging, it's about independent (!) audit/t
413.
by ajross 8mo ago
> The tradeoff Go made is that certain code just cannot be written in it. Uh... yeah? That's true of basically all platforms, and anyone who says otherwise is selling something. > it gets painful once you leave that path Still l
414.
by ajross 8mo ago
> Those deps have to come from somewhere, right? Unless you're actually rolling your own everything The point is someone needs to curate those "deps". It's not about rolling your own, it's about pulling standa
415.
by ajross 8mo ago
Except all of that was widely recognized and reported on at the time. People just didn't care. Lots of people will argue about this stuff until they're blue in the face, but no one is "surprised" by any of the eviden
416.
by ajross 8mo ago
There's clearly a difference between "what about" as a distraction technique (introducing an unrelated argument to avoid having to defend the original) and pointing out the existence of a clearly related issue. This is &qu
417.
by ajross 8mo ago
>> The world sucks. Whataboutism only makes it worse. > USAID is nowhere near the most effective nor the most important source of soft power for the U.S. And the goalposts move again. Your original point was that soft power was ba
418.
by ajross 8mo ago
> control their own destinies without interference from the US Not on the menu. The question is do you want them controlled by the US or by China?
419.
by ajross 8mo ago
> 1. USAID was never purely a soft power instrument and has extensive integration with the IC, including providing cover for destructive and often illegal programs, i.e. clandestine infra. That's... pretty much a good definition of
420.
by ajross 8mo ago
> WebKit Sort of an exception that proves the rule. Yes, it's great and was released for free. But at least partially that's not a strategic decision from Apple but just a requirement of the LGPLv2 license[1] under which they

More ›