bccdee

36 ms·

541.
by bccdee 2y ago
This is an argument against people having rights at all. "Oh, you think you're entitled to X? Well, in certain scenarios, X might cause harm. You might use free speech to advocate for something bad, or leverage your immunity to un
542.
by bccdee 2y ago
I think the big benefit comes from hiding implementation details away from tests. Here—let me copy-paste an example I used elsewhere in this thread: --- With mock injection: m = new FooMock() m.call("Bar", 1, 2) m.ca
543.
by bccdee 2y ago
The value-add for (3) is that "nullables" encapsulate all the fiddly details that mocks (tend to) expose. Here's an example. With mock injection: m = new FooMock() m.call("Bar", 1, 2) m.call("Baz&
544.
by bccdee 2y ago
Right—I agree that they'll be fine once they hatch & become a greater being. I was responding to this comment: > if there's a torture that you've heard of, or any cautionary tale you've seen reported, you are goin
545.
by bccdee 2y ago
They live each life separately, though, with no memories of their other lives. Joe from Idaho isn't suffering in the moment because of the experiences of some poor sap halfway across the world, even if they're both part of a great
546.
by bccdee 2y ago
Sure. I'm not saying the good outweighs the bad in every individual life. But you're explicitly picking the most extreme examples, and this is a claim being made about life in general.
547.
by bccdee 2y ago
> Rather that there is only one person ever who goes through all lives. So what? They're not really meaningfully one person until all the memories get collected. If they each start as a blank slate, they're all functionally sep
548.
by bccdee 2y ago
`makeThingDoerForTest` is a standalone function (or static method) that never gets called in production code. I don't see why it needs to be in an entirely separate module. If you want, you could put it in a separate thing_test module,
549.
by bccdee 2y ago
The guy in the story has as much free will as anyone does. Just because everything's stitched together with time travel, doesn't mean the individual instances of the character aren't making authentic choices in each moment. F
550.
by bccdee 2y ago
That's not true at all though. This is how a baby thinks about a needle. Often pain is less painful than we expect, and pleasure is pleasantly surprising. > The pain in the world always outweighs the pleasure. If you don't beli
551.
by bccdee 2y ago
> And it plays out over a trillion or so years. Horrifying. Horrifying to whom? The character isn't suffering. They aren't aware of the passage of those trillions of years. There's nothing any more horrifying about this th
552.
by bccdee 2y ago
I'm pretty fond of this article. I think it's an interesting approach, and I think you can generalize it out into some very useful principles. The big takeaway, I think, is that a particular module of code should encapsulate its o
553.
by bccdee 2y ago
I suggest you enforce an actual 1-word limit on submissions. You're facing some very uncreative prompt injection attempts.
554.
by bccdee 2y ago
My favourite way to do it is with `format()`, as in a="""a={q}{q}{q}{a}{q}{q}{q} b=a.format(q={q}{b}{q}{q}, b={q}{b}{b}{q}, a=a) print(b)""" b=a.format(q="\"", b="\\",
555.
by bccdee 2y ago
> how things were 1 year ago Not a substantial productivity multiplier. > how things are today Somewhat better than before, but still not a substantial productivity multiplier. > Don’t you expect things will not improve in the next
556.
by bccdee 2y ago
Okay what's the categorical difference? Which meaningful category includes one but not the other?
557.
by bccdee 2y ago
The deltas between the others are mostly not significant either. They're all about equally good. There's no categorical difference between GPT-4 and Claude 3.5.
558.
by bccdee 2y ago
Blanket universal skepticism is not a good thing. It's bad to hear "vaccines are good" from doctors and "vaccines at bad" from quacks and treat both with equal degrees of skepticism. At some point we do have to beli
559.
by bccdee 2y ago
Again: Those are incremental improvements. The valuations are based on the promise that agents are just around the corner, and we just haven't seen the kind of categorical shift in intelligence that agents would require.
560.
by bccdee 2y ago
Definitely. Me or anyone else from the future with a century's worth of hindsight.
561.
by bccdee 2y ago
Cars replaced streetcars, not horses. Few people in big cities were getting on horseback to commute to work in the morning in the early 20th century. People generally walked or took the streetcar.
562.
by bccdee 2y ago
> The reason why cities are designed around cars is that cars were designed to fit in contemporary cities and they co-evolved over the 20th century No, the switch to car-centric infrastructure was a deliberate policy choice lobbied for b
563.
by bccdee 2y ago
The leader, perhaps, but not by a large margin, and only on these sample benchmarks. "Co-state-of-the-art" is the term used in the article, and I'm going to take that at face value.
564.
by bccdee 2y ago
Yes there is. Germ theory is settled science. Is it theoretically possible that we'll overturn it? Sure. Is it likely? No. In the absence of any groundbreaking experimental results, it worth wasting time entertaining germ theory skepti
565.
by bccdee 2y ago
The creation of a model which is "co-state-of-the-art" (assuming it wasn't trained on the benchmarks directly) is not a win for scaling laws. I could just as easily claim out that xAI's failure to significantly outperfor
566.
by bccdee 2y ago
> for her, certain numbers are unspecific and she also is not coming to a clear conclusion in sense of climate change yes, no, bad, good. Climate chance is settled science. To claim that "certain numbers are unspecific, so I can&#x2
567.
by bccdee 2y ago
Tbh they'd have been right. Cars are expensive to buy and to maintain. They are difficult to operate—people die every day. They do smell bad, and the particulate matter they emit is extremely bad for you. And they are slow: Tra
568.
by bccdee 2y ago
> The valuations seem to be primarily based on the R&D progress There hasn't been much R&D progress, though. Sure, as another commenter pointed out, context lengths have gotten longer and chat models can interpret images now
569.
by bccdee 2y ago
Ignorant of what? Everyone knows what Trump and Musk have been doing. That's why people are denouncing them.
570.
by bccdee 2y ago
If it were actually reasoning generally, though, it wouldn't need to be trained on each game. It could be told the rules and figure things out from there.

More ›