fooker

16 ms·

331.
by fooker 6mo ago
You are absolutely right ;) If the US keeps maintaining a several decade technology lead forever, that is.. That has never really happened in history, so good luck I guess.
332.
by fooker 6mo ago
If you read my comment (or the article!) a bit more carefully, you'll see I mentioned comparable opponents. Yes, if you can bomb your opponent without retribution you can indeed get away with what we have now. This is what the F-35 and
333.
by fooker 6mo ago
Maybe you should read the article? Quantity is back in the game again thanks to drones, right now we would lose without escalating to a nuclear war.
334.
by fooker 6mo ago
> I thought the F-22 investigated the technologies and the F-35 is the mass-produced version. Sure, I'd think of it as a mass^2 produced version then ;) > Not if every jet takes 20 years to develop. Think of F-35 variants, not en
335.
by fooker 6mo ago
Mass produced means something very different when it comes to wars between comparable powers. There are barely more than a thousand F-35s, the number of US aircrafts used in WW2 was about 300,000. If China produces 100 times or 1000 times t
336.
by fooker 6mo ago
The primary purpose of something like the F-35 program is not producing a bunch of jets that we can use to win wars. Similar to how NASA's purpose is not to make large rockets that send things to orbit for cheap. It is to investigate n
337.
by fooker 6mo ago
We are talking about entirely different things. You are right, the output of a model that generates music directly is, for now, easy to categorize as AI. What this big flux of AI generated music online isn't really that. It'a a ti
338.
by fooker 6mo ago
Do not try to solve an unsolvable problem, you'll end up hurting real users quite a bit more than you might imagine. Imagine new enthusiastic users trying your platform getting hit with an AI label because of inevitable false positiv
339.
by fooker 6mo ago
This is how language models have worked since their inception, and has been steadily improved since about 2018. See embedding models. > they removed the tokenizer altogether This is an active research topic, no real solution in sight yet
340.
by fooker 6mo ago
There’s a new wave of hardware supporting fat pointers natively, so you are perhaps dismissing it too early. Also filc isn’t just fat pointers.
341.
by fooker 6mo ago
> tying the lifetimes into the type system is the correct way to do memory management. Type systems used to be THE sexy PL research topic for about twenty years or so, so all the programming languages innovation has been about doing eve
342.
by fooker 6mo ago
Just in time for LEAN to have made it almost completely obsolete.
343.
by fooker 6mo ago
There’s a long tail of diverse genres, but is hilarious to suggest that the total numbers add up to more than games where shooting is the primary activity.
344.
by fooker 6mo ago
I’m curious if you understand what majority means?
345.
by fooker 6mo ago
It has always puzzled me a little bit that shooting is a core mechanic in a majority of video games. Does this serve any purpose? Maybe it makes joining the military not too unappealing for teenagers.
346.
by fooker 6mo ago
Thou shalt maximize paperclips
347.
by fooker 6mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-waving
348.
by fooker 6mo ago
> oh it is all of ... oh its in the hands of ... a commercial company renowned for adverts. As opposed to governments renowned for colonizing half the world, destroying countless cultures, committing genocide in living memory?
349.
by fooker 6mo ago
This point naturally leads to a more general discussion. If AI can do everything and gets everyone out of jobs, who is going to consume the ‘everything’ produced by AI for someone to pay for the AI? I don’t think UBI is a real solution, it’
350.
by fooker 6mo ago
Straight out of 1984.
351.
by fooker 6mo ago
This is why republicans get votes. If you pull nonsense like this in a two party system, there are enough people with blind spots that it tilts the results against you. My favorite example of such a blind spot is a friend being flabbergaste
352.
by fooker 6mo ago
For sure, it makes sense for nice well defined problems that execute in isolation. Think of the situation where the string search is running on a system that has hyper threading and a bunch of cores, and a normal amount of memory bandwidth.
353.
by fooker 6mo ago
The comparison is often just plain old linear code. For example, one simd instruction vs multiple arithmetic instructions. x1 += y1 x2 += y2 x3 += y3 x4 += y4 We have fifty years of CPU design optimizing for this. More often
354.
by fooker 6mo ago
Go on, give it a try for a few days. My point is equally valid for "markets consistently value 'yes' too highly". The occasional 'no' will wipe you out on average.
355.
by fooker 6mo ago
SIMD performance in modern Intel and AMD cpus is so bad that it is useless outside very specific circumstances. This is mainly because vector instructions are implemented by sharing resources with other parts of the CPU and more or less sta
356.
by fooker 6mo ago
> It's not like CPUs are slow, in fact they're quite a bit faster than any single GPU thread. This was overwhelmingly true ten years ago, not so much now. Modern GPU threads are about 3Ghz, CPUs are still slightly faster in the
357.
by fooker 6mo ago
Leverage is not the steamroller here. It’s the 90% chance of making 1$ vs 10% chance of losing 100$. The exact numbers vary, the expectations even out with high volume stocks but prediction markets do not because of rounding that favors the
358.
by fooker 6mo ago
Oh no, it's not pointless. It's just doublespeak. It exists so there's a way to respond to demands like 'no criticizing Israel', or 'Taiwan is an inalienable part of China's territory', or double nega
359.
by fooker 6mo ago
> Whether it's pennies in front of a steamroller will depend on […] many other variables. No, all these variables cancel out. If you were picking and choosing, yes. But this approach is basically betting no on all the markets. The t
360.
by fooker 6mo ago
Don’t be gullible enough to fall for this bad math. Say 70% of the time it resolves to ‘no’, you still don’t make money by blindly choosing ‘no’. Guess why? Hint: This strategy is also described with the macabre analogy: picking up pennies

More ›