fwipsy

11 ms·

181.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
I think in this case "this isn't AI writing" is not a compliment. I find the tone pretty grating, tbh. The author clearly has a very high opinion of themselves. Just explain your ideas clearly so we can evaluate them on their
182.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
Or subverted in this case, I suppose. Can't have been very crisped if he could flee from the police.
183.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
This isn't even origami! The pattern clearly shows paper tabs meant to be held together with glue.
184.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
My experience with therapy has been that it's more of an art than a science. It's hard to say what good therapy even is - different people need different things. I would not want Freud or Jung to be my therapist. I think your idea
185.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
It's used in our PTP protocol implementation which is integrated with a half-dozen different customer-facing UIs, APIs, and documentation. We could add the new terminology, but we would need to keep supporting old terminology indefinit
186.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
More like 5 days, unless by "refactor" you mean #define master main
187.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
I haven't met anyone who is actually uncomfortable with the term "master," only people concerned about what others might think of them. It's not really being inclusive; it's just signaling inclusivity. Surely the ti
188.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
If the "terrorists" had changed the name of their bluetooth speaker, as asked, would they have been correct to proceed?
189.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
Microsoft wouldn't do that, because it would drive away other customers too. Maybe Australia would fold or maybe they would tough it out, but most other nations (and companies!) would start thinking about how quickly they could transit
190.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
So now we need enough neurons to do a track stand too?? I don't have the neurons for that...
191.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
I'm don't think it's possible to start a bike by pedalling with zero forward momentum. You will fall over. You need to kick off - start pedalling with the bike already moving forward. So you're right, and a third neuron
192.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
You can't have an economy with just AIs because they don't consume anything except compute. If AI can build more compute, they can definitely defend their owners. There's a limit to how much elites can consume. Most people ar
193.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
> While they'd love to reduce their actual costs, they'd only want to do it to the extent they are certain they can keep it secret. So you are saying that frontier AI labs are spending billions of dollars on datacenters as a fo
194.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
Can we not post clickbait to HN? My fault for clicking, I guess. An informative title would be e.g. "Compare your organization's Github productivity to @steipete."
195.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
There's a tension between "AI will take everyone's jobs" and "things will be expensive." If we lose our jobs to AI it will probably be because it has higher productivity, which will tend to make things cheaper
196.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
This is exactly what I expect from Elon Musk's AI.
197.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
All of us? All over the world? Elect not to do something that would make us individually rich and powerful, and instead accept the risk of being left behind if someone else does it? I don't know, I don't think many nations/or
198.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
How do you know what life was like 2000 years ago? I don't think you can truly know when this convention appeared. I suspect it's tied to urbanism at least. If you're living alone in the woods, miles from anywhere, and someon
199.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
It could perhaps work economically if AI automation also reduces the price of goods. What about automation-backed universal basic necessities? Mass-produced tract housing in the Midwest? Sounds awful but better than spending 90% of income o
200.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
If money remains backed by AI goods and services, it will remain valuable no matter how scare it gets. Scarcity raising prices is a fundamental law of economics. Your diamond example is just swapping which goods are scarce.
201.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
Domesticated horses are chattel. They existed for the needs of humans. When the needs went away the horses did too. Many of the world's poorest already exist without anyone's tolerance, even though their economic contributions are
202.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
New technology doesn't eradicate what came before. It only replaces what's profitable. There are still some people in the world subsistence farming. A tech worker is many orders of magnitude more productive in monetary terms, but
203.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
Why do you think that physical labor will become incredibly expensive if nobody has jobs? Do you think tools are that hard to get? Chinese tools are cheaper than ever.
204.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
Because "wealthy" is relative. Because the sort of people who do that stop at just "rich;" they don't make it to "super-rich."
205.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
They have their bunkers but it's not plan A. Even a psychotic oligarch doesn't want to live in a hole in the ground while the world collapses around them. They want to own the world, perhaps remake it in their image, but not destr
206.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
Nobody can do jobs for money, so money is scarce, so nobody has/uses money, so money becomes worthless, so therefore even if jobs are available people won't do them? Things become worth more as they become scarecer, not less.
207.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
Their official website advertises it as 16gb. But why stop there when they could go to 128gb? My laptop has TWO TERABYTES of potential RAM (pRAM!)
208.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
Right. It's destruction for the sake of profit, not (generally) for it's own sake. Different motivation, same outcome.
209.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
Consuming goods and services created far away creates a similar problem. If you don't know where it's from or how it's made, it feels like magic, not quite real, and in some sense like it could go away at any time.
210.
by fwipsy 5mo ago
That's not true. Capitalism is merely indifferent to things without economic value. If something is monetizable it will be monetized, which can be very harmful in itself, but capitalism does not seek destruction for it's own sake.

More ›