dlkf

7 ms·

31.
by dlkf 3y ago
If you don’t quantify these things and perform cost-benefit analysis, it’s like saying we shouldn’t drive cars , because in the worst case you burn alive. SSRI side effect prevalence is a hard thing to measure for a large variety of reasons
32.
by dlkf 3y ago
Parent claims that because we don’t eat meat plain, this shows that it isn’t the meat that ”tastes good”, its the seasoning. The fallacy is that we could have applied the exact same logic to the seasoning: we don’t eat steak seasoning plain
33.
by dlkf 3y ago
The fallacy here is pretty transparent. On the one hand, you’re saying meat ”doesn’t taste good” because it is usually not served in isolation. But on the other hand, you claim that seasoning tastes good, despite the fact that it is never
34.
by dlkf 3y ago
I love that someone has this take, but I think you should elaborate. In what sense are they terrible? Why do they experience sustained popularity? What does this tell us about Lindy?
35.
by dlkf 3y ago
The only detailed example Doctorow draws on (ODF) shows the free market converging on a good solution without government intervention. It’s an interesting case study, but it doesn’t illustrate what he thinks it does.
36.
by dlkf 3y ago
Like what? The lack of indoor plumbing? Or perhaps the high infant mortality rates? The only way to believe this is to live in total ignorance of history.
37.
by dlkf 3y ago
> We have reached the point of diminishing returns when it comes to technological development. Every generation says this, while at exactly the same time regarding previous ways of life completely unthinkable.
38.
by dlkf 3y ago
Martin Newell is an English singer and poet who probably doesn’t get the credit he deserves.
39.
by dlkf 3y ago
I encourage you to research whether flying has gotten safer or more dangerous since 1970, and then consider why that is.
40.
by dlkf 3y ago
Those things require energy. Incremental efficiency improvements will not make a big dent. Either we continue to use the same level of energy, or we start giving things up. It’s simple arithmetic.
41.
by dlkf 3y ago
Your comment, along with cpgxiii and n2d4’s are all really good. I have a question: suppose training and inference of an LLM were made to be deterministic at the cost of performance. Would the cost be “everything will take twice as long” or
42.
by dlkf 3y ago
> the "rocket fanatics" peaked in 1969 and humans haven't gone back to the moon, let alone conquered space What’s the point of going to the moon? Meanwhile, we have thousands of satellites in space that help predict the we
43.
by dlkf 3y ago
When you start using eg meth, you open up, with reasonable probability, a whole host of other externalities beyond impaired driving. (The same is true of alcohol, except with far lower probability, which is a key disanalogy.) Hard drug user
44.
by dlkf 3y ago
But it allows for an increase of the frequency at which those crimes are committed - at which point it’s too late. Sure, can punish the criminal afterwards, but the victim has already sufferred.
45.
by dlkf 3y ago
> In case you aren't, being able to do what you want with your own body does not include a right to harm others You have to make the argument that drug use doesn’t harm others. In a libertarian thought experiment maybe it doesn’t, b
46.
by dlkf 3y ago
> It's your body, you can do what you want with it. I can’t hit people with it, I can’t transport it onto private property, I can’t use it to yell all night, I can’t sell organs, the list is endless. Anything we do, we do with our b
47.
by dlkf 3y ago
> the applications of these sort of reasoning atomic configurations I think are unlimited They are limited to applications in which the latency slo is O(seconds), knowledge of 2021-present doesn’t matter, and you’re allowed to make thing
48.
by dlkf 3y ago
> They’re hugely successful corporations. Saying they’ve “lost” is a tad ridiculous. Let’s quantify it so it’s not ridiculous. Since getting their head start, they have ”lost” about 90% of total market share to American companies who are
49.
by dlkf 3y ago
> OVH and BT for example. Both of which predate AWS and GCP. How is this not an own goal? These companies had a head start and they still lost. Not by a little, but by such a staggering margin that AWS does two OOMs more revenue. > I
50.
by dlkf 3y ago
> creating art or music or playing go One of these things is not like the others
51.
by dlkf 3y ago
How does the issue of plagiarism bear on its utility? That’s like saying it’s impossible to get value out of listening to a torrented mp3. I’m not sure understanding is an inherent issue either. When I Google ”weather lisbon,” Google spits
52.
by dlkf 3y ago
> But analyzing his mental condition is sure as shit not up to me or to anybody else. Why not? Am I unallowed to suggest that Howard Hughes had OCD? That Kurt Gödel was paranoid? Submitting a hypothesis about some’s mental condition is a
53.
by dlkf 3y ago
By ”the Pepsi critique” I specifically meant the exposure of both variants to a single user. I agree with you that having users take a single sip is also a problem for construct validity. But it’s not clear from your post how this would thi
54.
by dlkf 3y ago
That isn’t how AB tests work. In a (properly-run) AB test, a user will only see one variant. AB tests have shortcomings, but the Pepsi critique isn’t one of them.
55.
by dlkf 3y ago
Da Vinci was a renaissance man?
56.
by dlkf 3y ago
Your argument would apply equally to a drunk driver who didn’t happen to crash that night. The problem is that taking pcp significantly raises the probability the user will commit an act of violence, by which point it’s too late.
57.
by dlkf 3y ago
> Even if you just make GPT-4 say 33% smarter What is your unit of intelligence?
58.
by dlkf 3y ago
> It's a massive, massive advancement in the field of statistics and learning from data, but doesn't seem to map to my conception of intelligence at all. You think ”learning from data” has nothing to do with ”intelligence” ?
59.
by dlkf 3y ago
I’m not talking about a single paper, I’m talking about a whole research programme. But Rumelhart, Hinton, Williams 1986 is very improtant. A lot of the foundational work is collected in the PDP report.
60.
by dlkf 3y ago
The idea that knowledge can be expressed in distributed representations rather than sequences of symbols is a huge advancement in our understanding of intelligence. Obviously we haven’t ”solved intelligence” but now we at least have some id

More ›