azan_

10 ms·

211.
by azan_ 5mo ago
If current LLM can do all the thinking for you then I'm terribly sorry. I use it mostly to do the boring and tedious tasks.
212.
by azan_ 5mo ago
I don't think that "China is evil" (or at least more evil than US) is reasonable position to hold nowadays.
213.
by azan_ 5mo ago
> It's best not to have a fever at all. Well put. Indeed non-free market solutions typically rely on some impossible conditions, in your comparison that would be "just don't get sick". But people will get sick. You ca
214.
by azan_ 5mo ago
What I meant was not that these problems wouldn't get solved for decades, but that few years ago (before advent of LLMs) if you've asked average researcher how far away are we from AI solving unsolved math problems, the median ans
215.
by azan_ 5mo ago
Care to elaborate?
216.
by azan_ 5mo ago
You don't need AGI. If AI progress stopped right now, LLMs would still be amazing and extremely useful technology. It already makes life for many much easier. But it's easy to miss it when you are entombed in anti-AI bubble. But I
217.
by azan_ 5mo ago
Yes, same as industrial revolution was worth sacrificing people's livelihood, because in the end we are much better off.
218.
by azan_ 5mo ago
AI agents that can solve frontier math problems, something that few years ago was decades away.
219.
by azan_ 5mo ago
I don't think so. I believe that there will be some kind of breaking point and young people will just refuse to provide luxurious space communism for pensioners.
220.
by azan_ 5mo ago
> Then why are birth rates falling across all income levels in all countries? Please take the time to research your position. Well yeah, if they are falling across all income levels then not being able to afford children can’t be the rea
221.
by azan_ 5mo ago
Asking people why they don’t have children is worthless. We should look at revealed preferences, not stated.
222.
by azan_ 5mo ago
No, the solution is increasing pension age. Funneling money from young to elderly is the opposite of solution.
223.
by azan_ 5mo ago
Ah yes, let’s funnel more money to pensioners!
224.
by azan_ 5mo ago
If lower tax rates are so bad, then why are workers nowadays much, much richer than back then?
225.
by azan_ 5mo ago
How is it obvious? In that scenario, companies should avoid IPO even though it makes situation of workers better?
226.
by azan_ 5mo ago
If you don't want discussion to turn into cesspool, I suggest not using terms like "Epstein class".
227.
by azan_ 5mo ago
> I’d much rather pay the prices corrected-for-supporting-livelihoods, than the artificially inflated prices used to line the pockets of the rich. But unless you do central planning (which doesn't work) you can't really separat
228.
by azan_ 5mo ago
What are you talking about? Minimum wage has nowadays a lot wider coverage and many unions have absurd privileges and compensations (e.g. docking unions) for which entire society has to pay. Even recently NYC hotel keepers have managed to n
229.
by azan_ 5mo ago
> We are colletively at a breaking point as a society where people legitimately can't afford to exist in a society Aren't poverty rates being reduced basically everywhere and people getting richer across all deciles? The truth
230.
by azan_ 5mo ago
Ok, let's follow that logic. If IPO makes CEO much, much richer but generally also makes company and workers better off (but to smaller degree), does IPO make workers more undercompensated? Nobody lost anything for the CEO to gain. Als
231.
by azan_ 5mo ago
I think its pretty naive to thing that it'd work this way. It's really bad idea. If someone has company that debuts on stock market, and stock price increases let's say 100x times, who is he funneling the funds from? I'd
232.
by azan_ 5mo ago
> Citation needed. Very little of what we buy today as a consumer are commodities whose price is determined primarily by the cost of production — and even then labor costs are rarely the most significant cost. Services and goods where lo
233.
by azan_ 5mo ago
People should realise that they will be the ones paying for it. Prices will increase a lot. People need to be aware of that. Personally I'm okay with that trade-off. Also corporations - when checks and balances work properly, which is
234.
by azan_ 5mo ago
> I'm sure you tell homeless people on the street that their demand for housing will in the end increase availability for everyone Whatever you say mate.
235.
by azan_ 5mo ago
Increased demand will result in more money for new hardware investments and will in the end decrease prices and provide better technology for everyone. Like it always has.
236.
by azan_ 5mo ago
That's the worst critique of AI I've ever heard, and I've heard a lot of it.
237.
by azan_ 5mo ago
I'm not making that assumption. Specifically - I'm not making any assumption about nature of human intelligence, including not making assumption that it's not stochastic process. You exclude possibility that it is stochastic
238.
by azan_ 5mo ago
> Because it's capable of impressive things? Precisely. Calling it autocomplete when it's capable of completing tasks that have nothing to do with autocomplete is silly. If you want to be consistent with your terminology, you&#
239.
by azan_ 5mo ago
Spot on.
240.
by azan_ 5mo ago
It's amazing that there are people who still believe in "it's just autocomplete". It hasn't been true for a long time, but currently it's position that reveals complete lack of awareness how good AI has become.

More ›