causal

11 ms·

1. 241.▲
   by causal 7mo ago

   No idea why you're being downvoted. We can't yet even demonstrate that LLMs will withstand training on their own output as they pollute the Internet.
2. 242.▲
   by causal 7mo ago

   There are numerous governments in any given country, if you consider the various overlapping jurisdictions. Taleb sees business and government as equally incompetent, but businesses are supposed to die and so make room for better ideas to t
3. 243.▲
   by causal 7mo ago

   Then why deny it a harness it can also use in a human centric world?
4. 244.▲
   by causal 7mo ago

   The issue is that ARC AGI 3 specifically forbids harnesses that humans get to use.
5. 245.▲
   by causal 7mo ago

   Well, yes, and would hand even more of an advantage to humans. My point is that designing a test around human advantages seems odd and orthogonal to measuring AGI.
6. 246.▲
   by causal 7mo ago

   Thanks, I mostly agree with your approach except for one thing: eyesight feels like a "harness" that humans get to use and LLMs do not. I'm guessing you did not pass the human testers JSON blobs to work with, and suspect they
7. 247.▲
   by causal 7mo ago

   I kind of prefer Credit Card over anything else if I have to do it. I give out my CC pretty regularly already so not much new PII to lose there. But it does sound like Apple has bugs to work out.
8. 248.▲
   by causal 7mo ago

   I think it's just sarcasm coming from the stereotypical HN attitude that Product Managers only get in the way of the real work of engineering. Ignore it; they're basically proving your point.
9. 249.▲
   by causal 7mo ago

   I'm an engineer and I totally agree. Engineers + LLMs exacerbate the timeless problem of not understanding the reality behind the problem. Validating solutions against reality is hard and LLMs just hallucinate their way around unknowns
10. 250.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    You need to change the title or actually include 1T parameter model content.
11. 251.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    Yeah title comes from nowhere in the link. No doubt it's possible but all that matters is speed and we learn nothing of that here...
12. 252.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    AI makes the first 90% of writing an app super easy and the last 10% way harder because you have all the subtle issues of a big codebase but none of the familiarity. Most people give up there.
13. 253.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    Run an incredible 400B parameters on a handheld device. 0.6 t/s, wait 30 seconds to see what these billions of calculations get us: "That is a profound observation, and you are absolutely right ..."
14. 254.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    I use Claude Code because Anthropic requires me to in order to get the generous subscription tokens. But better tools exist. If I was allowed to use Cursor with my Claude sub I would in a heartbeat.
15. 255.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    I've gotta say, it shows. Claude Code has a lot of stupid regressions on a regular basis, shit that the most basic test harness should catch.
16. 256.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    I don't think you've proven what you were hoping to prove. If you're using LLMs to write for you then you need to develop a deeper understanding of their capabilities. This is a required reading for anyone I have using AI: h
17. 257.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    I'm not an expert in the field, but this reads like someone trying to sound impressive by using big words without providing any solid detail.
18. 258.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    Petty? He's accusing them of fraud, and if he's right then yeah we should all be disappointed in Eon's deceptive marketing. Fully simulating a drosophila has been a high goal for a very long time and great claims require grea
19. 259.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    Damn, then we automated bullshit generation
20. 260.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    That's about as polite as you can get, and it's still risky: people get defensive, the output might NOT be from an LLM, etc. That's the asymmetry of the problem: Writing with AI delegates the thinking to the reader as well as
21. 261.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    Straightforward is ambiguous. To replicate NanoClaw would probably only take about a day of work and testing and refining in Claude Code, but that's a day I didn't have to spend to get NanoClaw.
22. 262.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    I like NanoClaw a lot. I found OpenClaw to be a bloated mess, NanoClaw implementation is so much tighter. It's also the first project I've used where Claude Code is the setup and configuration interface. It works really well, and
23. 263.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    This is true, but the attack surface on your life is decreased by better security around the entire setup. But I fundamentally agree that there is just too much overlap between what makes claws useful and what makes them insecure.
24. 264.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    This question doesn't even make sense. Why wouldn't humans still be the ones responsible? Bot account?
25. 265.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    Wait - what was the AI tool and how did it have her face to begin with? If small-town police are doing face-matching searches across national databases then nobody is safe because the number of false positives is going to be MASSIVE by shee
26. 266.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    This x1000. We need to suspend this shared fiction that AI has any agency. Only humans can be responsible. Full stop.
27. 267.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    Yep. I actually prefer seeing imperfect writing, there is signal there that AI would erase.
28. 268.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    Ah. That might be why I find it especially triggering.
29. 269.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    I'm with you on this. I worked on a big Temporal project briefly and I was really turned off by how much of the codebase was just rote mapping properties from one layer to the next.
30. 270.▲
    by causal 7mo ago

    If you really DID come up with that paragraph 100% completely on your own with no LLM influence then...I apologize for the insult, though I can't really back out from what I said. It's still a bombastic way of saying very little.