danlitt

5 ms·

31.
by danlitt 3mo ago
This does not sound like an accurate description of "rational agents". A rational agent may value something less because of a perceived second-order effect (e.g. "If I accept a price hike, there will be more price hikes in th
32.
by danlitt 3mo ago
That specific conclusion is unaffected, but that doesn't make it okay. If they used fake numbers, but the conclusion were still the same, you presumably wouldn't think that was okay either?
33.
by danlitt 3mo ago
I had to look 3 times to see what you meant. That's pure evil!
34.
by danlitt 3mo ago
Interesting fact, but the slop filler is distracting.
35.
by danlitt 3mo ago
I don't think it makes sense to say you "made money" when you still have an open-ended liability active.
36.
by danlitt 3mo ago
This joke only works if you actually impose a cost on AWS of 1.7 billion. If they just serve you a bill for no reason, it's still your problem.
37.
by danlitt 3mo ago
This presumes that it is reasonable for a seller to remove the capacity in principle to buy the digital good. They might refuse ever to sell a copy again, and only permit renting it. Since copyright grants a long monopoly this opens up scop
38.
by danlitt 3mo ago
That is not an innocent explanation, any more than someone breaking into your house to adjust your thermostat.
39.
by danlitt 3mo ago
Same reason people give postgres, php, or any other program a user account.
40.
by danlitt 3mo ago
The comment I'm replying to said "no skill is involved", not "less skill is involved".
41.
by danlitt 3mo ago
I don't understand this comment at all. "At least 1000 words" would require at least the skills of writing decently & writing a moderate amount based on little. I get that getting to exactly 1000 requires some skill, but
42.
by danlitt 3mo ago
Did you read beyond the first sentence? This reply makes no sense if you read the whole comment.
43.
by danlitt 3mo ago
> 3d printing control laws that are being passed in NY The "don't print guns" laws? What lobby would that be? I actually agree that the US is very vulnerable to lobbying and that 3d printing restrictions are dumb, but I
44.
by danlitt 3mo ago
> i dont think there is any software on the planet that i would consider "truly life changing" I don't think there is any software on the planet that has accumulated 1.5 trillion dollars of otherwise-useful money!
45.
by danlitt 3mo ago
Please explain. That is exactly what the linked case established.
46.
by danlitt 3mo ago
For someone who finds this "not unintuitive" you sure are confused! "Just like I can learn from a book" - ok. Are you allowed to go to libgen and download a book in order to learn from it, because learning is a fair use?
47.
by danlitt 3mo ago
You have to admit that "downloading every book ever written for free from a repository of books that is itself illegal to compile and to run, in order to write a text generation tool" being legal is at least unintuitive, to put it
48.
by danlitt 3mo ago
The code is not eligible for copyright. If they do not give you a copy of the source code, that does not matter. And if you don't know which parts were generated by LLM, you can't safely reuse the code.
49.
by danlitt 3mo ago
I don't think I would conclude you're a moron. I don't think you really "hold everything in your mind's eye" when you understand something. I don't know how I do it or how it really works (nobody does). Bu
50.
by danlitt 3mo ago
I read and understand the code using my brain, by constructing a mental model and reasoning about it. An AI can't do this because they don't have mental models and don't do reasoning.
51.
by danlitt 3mo ago
I seriously thought this was a joke the first time I read it. Are people really able to work like this, understanding nothing and just poking the machine until it does your job for you?
52.
by danlitt 4mo ago
This reply is so far removed from the comment you replied to I'm worried you replied to the wrong one. They did not mention anything about people who haven't built anything, startups with no users, and having no references - you i
53.
by danlitt 4mo ago
> He’s described Ruby’s design as starting from a simple Lisp, stripping out macros and s-expressions Put the macros back! It would be so cool!
54.
by danlitt 4mo ago
He only really addresses the fact that the system can be nasty. It can be and regularly is, but he only argues that a company doesn't have to be nasty, so he can conveniently ignore specific examples. But the system is not just nasty
55.
by danlitt 4mo ago
But "earning" does not mean "obtain without cheating"! Nobody (that I have spoken to) speaks of earning their lottery winnings. The claim is that owning a company worth a billion dollars is more like winning the lotter
56.
by danlitt 4mo ago
But tokens are just text! Isn't it all just text? If you're training and you encounter "the", is that an instruction "the" or a data "the"?
57.
by danlitt 4mo ago
Yes, it's a serious problem. It's why we remove humans from these systems whenever possible!
58.
by danlitt 4mo ago
What does this mean, actually? If you are imagining that blue tokens are just words, maybe the "token space" is just all things that we agree might be words, what are the red tokens? Are they not text? You could maybe encode words
59.
by danlitt 4mo ago
> You can't guarantee an LLM does anything. Agreed. > But that doesn't mean that separation between instructions and data is impossible. Yes it does! The comments you are replying to are concerned that it is not possible to
60.
by danlitt 4mo ago
Everyone can imagine some experiences. No-one can imagine every experience. Why are you so sure you know what it's like to be a bat? Do you know how a bat works, how its brain generates sensations, how different sensory organs than you

More ›