falcor84

28 ms·

691.
by falcor84 11mo ago
> At the start of his quest, Bushby made two rules for himself, neither of which he has broken. > “I can’t use transport to advance, and I can’t go home until I arrive on foot,” Bushby said. “If I get stuck somewhere, I have to figure
692.
by falcor84 11mo ago
In practice, communist countries have always put a lot of effort into keeping their citizens in.
693.
by falcor84 11mo ago
It was clearly a response to the grandparent's "... isn't like this for other animals". It's a fine thing to aspire to be better, but we just shouldn't be claiming that human behavior is any way less natural th
694.
by falcor84 11mo ago
The main benefit for me is of the upvotes and comments telling me which solutions/approaches are better than others and why. Present day LLMs on their own don't have that context, nor the critical thinking. As I see it, the next s
695.
by falcor84 11mo ago
The ironic thing of course is that to the extent a distinguishing feature between human and LLM writing can be well-defined, it can be optimized against by the next version of LLMs, assuming a financial incentive. At this stage, it's c
696.
by falcor84 11mo ago
Wow, this is the most overt "Might Makes Right" thing I've seen in the modern era. As a kid reading sci-fi, I was always amused by all those futuristic societies acting like medieval empires; I'm not amused any more.
697.
by falcor84 11mo ago
At this stage, it's very much a "True Scotsman" situation. But as I see it, companies are advertising for Full Stack Engineers as a way of getting people who would never say "Why did you give me this task?! This is outsi
698.
CodeClash(codeclash.ai)
2 points by falcor84 11mo ago|0 comments
699.
by falcor84 11mo ago
You are probably right that Japan were close to surrendering and had begun some signaling around it, particularly via the soviets, but my understanding is that they hadn't actually done that, and according to the sources I read, they a
700.
by falcor84 11mo ago
I think you might have an overly noble view of Homo Erectus. I believe that a fellow member of the species is at least as likely to get that hand axe smashed into their skull as they're likely to benefit from it.
701.
by falcor84 11mo ago
Well, obviously it's not the most representative example, but yes, if a country intends to kill hundreds of thousands of people, then an atomic bomb is probably the most cost-effective way, even after accounting for R&D. Moreover,
702.
by falcor84 11mo ago
I don't see any evidence of worker exploitation being caused in any even semi-direct way by AI integration. In the field of animation and VFX in particular, while I've never worked in that area myself, essentially everyone I'
703.
by falcor84 11mo ago
As I see it, the purpose of AI is the same as the purpose of every technology ever since the hand axe - to reduce labor. Humans have a strong drive to figure out ways to achieve more with less effort. Obviously there are higher order effect
704.
by falcor84 11mo ago
For better or worse, a lot of job interviews actually do use contrived questions like this, such as the infamous "how many golf balls can you fit in a 747?"
705.
by falcor84 11mo ago
> It isn’t trained to consider second-order effects. Well said. There's precious little of that in the human writings that we gave it.
706.
by falcor84 11mo ago
Thanks, I see how this would make sense in general. But it does go against this particular case, no? L&D should probably be budgeted outside the widget COGS anyway, but assuming that the widget department has a single budget, and they&#
707.
by falcor84 11mo ago
My reading of tfa is exactly that - the author is hoping that we'll have at least a generation or so to adapt, like horses did, but is concerned that it might be significantly more rapid.
708.
by falcor84 11mo ago
Did you just write a short lesson to explain the difference between capex and opex? Well... thank you, I guess. But again, the question is: is it ever rational for a functional unit manager to be given a particular maximum opex budget and n
709.
by falcor84 11mo ago
I don't know if it says good or bad things about me, but I never noticed that. But maybe it's just because I started reading his works long after their initial release. In particular, I was quite surprised to later learn that &quo
710.
by falcor84 11mo ago
To be clear, my question was about whether there is a situation where it is rational from a management accounting perspective to define a unit's budget like this.
711.
by falcor84 11mo ago
Maybe it's just some peculiarity I'm missing, but wouldn't a smaller capex sum be a pareto improvement over a larger opex? Is there any way in which denying the suggestion was rational?
712.
by falcor84 11mo ago
> Nobody was making money from the process. From the people I know who wrote or co-wrote books, the way you make money is in future interview processes. I don't know if they still do it, but when I interviewed for Google, they had a
713.
by falcor84 11mo ago
Another option might be that people are increasingly using LLMs to write the books.
714.
by falcor84 11mo ago
It's the oldest trick in the IT book - focus on the buyer persona and ignore the user persona.
715.
by falcor84 11mo ago
I'm not familiar with many "consumers" who still pick a Windows and Office, and in this generation, there are very few consumers picking xbox. Outside of enterprises, they seem to be losing market share everywhere, and at thi
716.
by falcor84 11mo ago
I read that this works on humans too. Minds can break.
717.
by falcor84 11mo ago
You think that this might be another ChatGPT/Docker/Hadoop case, where Google comes up with the technology but doesn't care to productize it?
718.
by falcor84 11mo ago
I often find myself in these situations where I'm afraid that if I don't finish infodumping everything in a single message, it'll go in the wrong direction. So what I've been doing is switching it back to Plan Mode (even
719.
by falcor84 11mo ago
> “I have found out what economics is; it is the science of confusing stocks with flows” - Michael Kalecki
720.
by falcor84 11mo ago
When reasoning about sufficiently complex mechanisms, you benefit from adopting the Intentional Stance regardless of whether the thing on the other side is "some form of human". For example, when I'm planning a competitive st

More ›