alganet

12 ms·

121.
by alganet 1y ago
Usability and security are very hard to conciliate. One usually compromises the other. I don't see blockchains as particularly "more trustworthy", specially in the current state of things.
122.
by alganet 1y ago
All Terminator movies feature a storyline in which humans were rushing tech development at all costs. That's... the main thing.
123.
by alganet 1y ago
Be mindful of cultural trends and retconing your own mind. Nanobots (or nanites, or nano-tech) is a trope that came much later in cinema. That trend was definitely influenced by some T3 stuff, however, in T3 terms, the Terminatrix is still
124.
by alganet 1y ago
I interpret the post as the author trying to convey a message of self-worth. From where I am, I can't possibly know if that's a genuine message with valuable advice, or some self-justification he's making about himself, or so
125.
by alganet 1y ago
> At any rate, this privacy threat is critical given the growing concern among users about their digital footprints—a recent survey found that seven out of every ten people have taken actions to protect their online identity, from disabl
126.
by alganet 1y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense
127.
by alganet 1y ago
Would I tell my layman friends to use a crypto product or program? Definitely not. It has been abused extensively by scammers, money laundrers and all sorts of bad people. I can't say to them "trust this". On the contrary. My
128.
by alganet 1y ago
As much regulatory measures as possible seems good. This things are not toys.
129.
by alganet 1y ago
Thing is, it sounds like more than I could take. I mean, formal math, not TypeScript. For TS I really just need some solid notion about sets, maybe some experience with generics, and patience to deal with how other people annotated their ty
130.
by alganet 1y ago
I was talking in fiction terms with a hint of philosophy. You're doing more of a techno-mix between current LLMs and religion, which is definitely interesting, but disconnected from what I said.
131.
by alganet 1y ago
> We will never achieve AGI, because we keep moving the goalposts. I think it's fair to do it to the idea of AGI. Moving the goalpost is often seen as a bad thing (like, shifting arguments around). However, in a more general sense,
132.
by alganet 1y ago
I have a radical hypothesis that intelligence leads to empathy, empathy leads to kindness, and a superinteligent AI should be kinder than any human has ever been. I also believe that as soon as someone boots up an AI that is kind, they&#x27
133.
by alganet 1y ago
Half an hour into the interview, and it sounds pretty good! I'm genuinely surprised.
134.
by alganet 1y ago
> Human experts won, but barely Sounds good. Let me know when LLMs get there!
135.
by alganet 1y ago
My worldview considers the existance of lobbies and human neglect. It seems more nuanced than "believe the management" rethoric.
136.
by alganet 1y ago
C'mon, you are familiar with AI-2027 and not AI apocalypse movies? That's sloppy. I know all of the Terminator movies by heart.
137.
by alganet 1y ago
The user @brailsafe gave an answer that embodies some things I was going to say. You're accounting for the time wins, not accounting for the time losses. For a human chat user, that's when the LLM fails an answer or answers wrong.
138.
by alganet 1y ago
China is a central part of the AI-2027 speculation. I can't believe you missed it. I'm acusing AI-2027 of doing bad taste stuff, not you. Unless you are one of the authors, you don't have to feel offended. I am acusing you of
139.
by alganet 1y ago
You could have recorded, found it to be good, and didn't shared the news. Only used for your self. But you decided to share only the news , not the recording. That tells me something. To be more clear, I can move this argument further
140.
by alganet 1y ago
> I don’t know how much. If you're not willing to measure how it helps you, then it's probably not worth it. I would go even further: if the effort of measuring is not feasible, then it's probably not worth it. That is mor
141.
by alganet 1y ago
> There is no putting the genie back in the bottle. Yes. There is no putting the genie back in the bottle. > Then anyone can verify the provenance chain: Was this made by a human? Which AI created it? Has it been altered since creatio
142.
by alganet 1y ago
> It makes a point of AI increasingly being used in decision making But that is nothing new. Everyone knows that. Go back to square one, my first comment, Terminator 3: Rise of The Machines. So, in what aspect AI-2027 is new? I can tel
143.
by alganet 1y ago
Me: "This food is bad, tastes like shit" You: "Are you saying that cooking is wrong?" Me: "Cooking is fine, but this food is bad, tastes like shit" It's just that simple. You are free to eat shit if you wa
144.
by alganet 1y ago
The word intuition here have power. Surely you must have noticed that vibe coding and intuition have a strong connection. There are people (definitely not me) who buy 100% of anything AI they read. To that beginner enthusiastic audien
145.
by alganet 1y ago
Yes, you misinterpreted. It's a valid connection, I just found it to be in bad taste and I disagree on doing it.
146.
by alganet 1y ago
> enhance their AI sales I said "conflict of interest", not "enhancing sales". You could have asked for a clarification. What I mean by conflict of interest is that whatever is under the "Bloomberg" name see
147.
by alganet 1y ago
> In 1962 Kennedy declared... Too much speed: Apollo 1. Safety was ignored, three astronauts died before ever reaching space. Another famous country tried to leap forward too fast, ended up with a Great Famine That I Can Write In Capital
148.
by alganet 1y ago
Conflict of interest: https://www.bloomberg.com/professional/solutions/ai/
149.
by alganet 1y ago
I love how Schopenhauer can be succint on the nature of writing: ``` There are, first of all, two kinds of authors: those who write for the subject's sake, and those who write for writing's sake. While the one have had thoughts or
150.
by alganet 1y ago
Do not be mistaken, we totally disagree. Not all predictions are fiction. I would not try to fit AI-2027 into a news article, you did. See? Disagreeing heavily here.

More ›