falcor84

31 ms·

631.
by falcor84 10mo ago
As I see it, it's because it didn't want to. Hear me out: let's say that generating a new and better compression algorithm is something that might take a dedicated researcher about a year of their life, and that person is bei
632.
by falcor84 10mo ago
The biggest boneheaded decision from my perspective was their taking over the + prefix in Google search (to filter for results that have this term verbatim). That just positioned G+ as my enemy and I had a strong desire for it to die. Unfor
633.
by falcor84 10mo ago
Going to the September article, I see: > The stake will make Nvidia one of Intel's largest shareholders, giving it roughly 4% of the company after new shares are issued. Is that 4% still accurate?
634.
by falcor84 10mo ago
It's a dimension of neglect. If I run a service advertising itself as preventing people from harming themselves or each other (e.g. a mental health institution), then it would be criminally negligent of me to not limit people's ac
635.
by falcor84 10mo ago
What's sad about it? Why should it be censored?
636.
by falcor84 10mo ago
I would argue that "knowledge" is an almost meaningless concept on its own. What assessments measure is a more complex form of "competency", and the competency of being able to write an essay on a topic is different from
637.
by falcor84 10mo ago
That's nitpicking; in this manner you can dismiss any analogy, by finding an aspect on which it's different from the original comparandum.
638.
by falcor84 10mo ago
> AI will probably be smarter than any single human next year. Arguably that's already so. There's no clear single dimension for "smart"; even within exact sciences, I wouldn't know how to judge e.g. "Who wa
639.
by falcor84 10mo ago
I am yet to see an "AI doesn't impress me" comment that added anything to the discussion. Yes, there's always going to be a state of the art and things that are as of yet beyond the state of the art.
640.
by falcor84 10mo ago
Interesting. What particular 1998 claims do you have in mind that were not (at least approximately) fulfilled?
641.
by falcor84 10mo ago
The "bubble" is in the financial investment, not in the technology. AI won't disappear after the bubble bursts, just like the web didn't disappear after 2000. If anything, bursting the financial bubble will most likely e
642.
by falcor84 10mo ago
Why would you spend $200 a day on Opus if you can pay that for a month via the highest tier Claude Max subscription? Are you using the API in some special way?
643.
by falcor84 10mo ago
Well, there's a massive amount of public domain and creative commons content being released all the time; we don't need to wait for copyrighted works.
644.
by falcor84 10mo ago
I've been imagining even just having legal access to the Spotify (or similar) API to legally stream music, so I could pay the rights holders without having to deal with these annoying interfaces. Can I not have that? I'm even will
645.
by falcor84 10mo ago
It is not uncommon to pay for access to in-person social clubs and other third places, so I don't see an inherent barrier. Indeed, these can be considered Veblen goods, whereby you my may want to pay to have access to a place that keep
646.
by falcor84 10mo ago
What's sync and why would someone need it to access this?
647.
by falcor84 10mo ago
> But I'm always tickled by logicians who think type theories are philosophically superior to set theories because in some of the latter you might be able to prove something like 1 ∈ 2 Note that this is actually how the basic ZF con
648.
by falcor84 10mo ago
That could actually be really cool: Create a simulation of a universe with arbitrary physical laws, have it evolve sentient life, and submit the first video game they develop which matches the theme. The theme this year is "rotations&q
649.
by falcor84 10mo ago
The reference is most likely to: > "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." Which TFA (and others) misattribute to Einstein
650.
by falcor84 10mo ago
Well, that's obviously an exaggeration, but in any case, there's a choice here. Historically interface designers expected users to read a manual, and later to at least go through some basic onboarding and then read the occasional
651.
by falcor84 10mo ago
I actually agree there's an issue here. I feel we've been dumbing down interfaces so much, to the extent that people who in previous generations would barely write and who wouldn't affect anyone outside their close friends an
652.
by falcor84 10mo ago
Agreed, it's definitely a problem, but I'm just saying that it's the basic problem of "people sometimes say bullshit that other people take at face value". It's not a technical problem. The most relevant approa
653.
by falcor84 10mo ago
As I understand it, terms of use on a publicly accessible page aren't enforceable. That's why it's legal to e.g. scrape pages of news sites regardless of any terms of use. If it's curlable, it's fair game (but it&#x
654.
by falcor84 10mo ago
> you'd also need to allowlist Claude itself This is Anthropic's recommended setup for devcontainers: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/blob/main/.devcont... You may want to adapt it
655.
by falcor84 10mo ago
I don't see how this is different from the classic citogenesis process; no AI needed. If a novel claim is of sufficient interest, then someone will end up actually doing proper research and debunking of it, probably having fun and gett
656.
by falcor84 10mo ago
> why should they not be able to choose "not for training uses" even if they put it up publically? I'm having trouble even parsing that question; "Publically" means that you put yourself out there, no? It sounds
657.
by falcor84 10mo ago
As I see it, the only real solution is to put it into a container that has a firewall with a short whitelist.
658.
by falcor84 10mo ago
But that's the thing, it's not about "more melanin", but rather about something like: The grass on the other side has a different amount of melanin be harder-to-achieve and thus more desirable because it previously signa
659.
by falcor84 10mo ago
As I see it, this is an inherent part of the tech industry. Unless you expressly choose to focus your career on maintaining legacy code, your value as a dev depends on your ability and willingness to continuously learn new tech.
660.
by falcor84 10mo ago
Why? I'm happy to spend VC money while they're offering it. If and when they stop giving me an offering that I'm satisfied with, I'll stop using it.

More ›