gaigalas

18 ms·

451.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
> the population of Tech Workers on HN isn't going to be indicative of Tech Workers as a whole That's why I'm asking for a real world example outside of the internet? It's all weird bubbles here. Your comment actually
452.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
[flagged]
453.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
Something is not clicking here. If Asimov wanted to give a good impression about exact predictive science, he made some terrible mistakes: - In his story, Hari Seldom predictions failed a lot. They had to be amended, fixed and tweaked sever
454.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
Is Paul McCartney an IT worker?
455.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
Fair enough. I was talking mainly about tech workers though (this website target audience), and I didn't made that distinction in the comment you replied to, but I did make it down the thread way before you replied.
456.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
Really, where was the anger? When did it happened? I see trash talk. We trash talk microwaves, for example, and that doesn't mean we hate them. I do believe this supposed anger is fabricated. Not conspiracy style fabricated, just fabri
457.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
Can you elaborate?
458.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
Do you believe people actually hate fidget spinners, or it was just internet talk? Show me manifestations of anger towards AI that actually happened outside of the internet. Some massive strike, some protest, something meaningful.
459.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
Where are the organized strikes? The protests on the front of tech companies? It simply doesn't exist. Tech workers who dislike AI are more indifferent than angry.
460.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
The internet dislikes a lot of things. It's meaningless. A substack post is not anger , an HN comment is not breaking machines. In IT specifically, people who dislike AI are simply not revolting. They're retiring or taking sabbat
461.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
I think the anger towards AI is completely fabricated. Where are the new luddites, really? I just don't see them. I see people talking about them, but they never actually show up. My theory is that they don't actually exist. Their
462.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
All problems that concern people are people problems. That's why we don't talk about it. It's like saying all rain is wet. Just assume the other person knows, and avoid one extra people problem.
463.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
So, you do understand that the great majority of science fiction at that time was trying to predict the future, right? Their Asimov was probably Verne, which already was trying to predict the future before them. Around Verne's time (an
464.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
Quick question: are you familiar with sci-fi themes from that era?
465.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
I don't understand your point, can you be more clear?
466.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
I understand some regimes have weird ideas, totally true. Marx however never tried to make exact scientific predictions in the lines of psychohistory. He made behavioral philosophical predictions (so did Adam Smith and many others, and all
467.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
My interpretation of psychohistory is simple: it's science fiction about what science fiction itself would look like if it turned into a real science. It has all the things science fiction does (attempts to predict the future, large sc
468.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
From the link you shared: > the maximum amount of information that is required to perfectly describe a given physical system _down to the quantum level_ (emphasis added by me) It looks like it makes predictions for the quantum layer and
469.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
We are seeing the same patterns: move to advertisement, anti-open source strategies, aggressive acquihires. Companies driving AI are dinosaurs, funded by dinosaurs or aiming to become like them. It literally feels like nothing has changed i
470.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
JavaScript is an interpreted language: write, run. No build steps required. Building was introduced as a temporary measure, to handle cross-browser awkwardness (grunt and stuff like that). People overused it. We totally don't need it a
471.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
I'm not talking about whether it exists or not. I'm talking about how AI makes it more believable to say that it exists. It seems very related, and I understand it's a very attractive hook to start talking about whether it ex
472.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
What I mean is that talking about mass persuation was (and to a certain degree, it still is) crackpot talk. I'm not talking about the persuations themselves, it's the general public perception of someone or some group that raises
473.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
> nothing in the article is AI-specific Timing is. Before AI this was generally seen as crackpot talk. Now it is much more believable.
474.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
For all we know, it could be distinct layers all the way down to infinity. Each time you peel one, something completely different comes up. Never truly knowable. The universe has thrown more than a few hints that our obsession with precisio
475.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
"It looks designed" means nothing. It could be our ignorance at play (we have a long proven track record of being ignorant about how things work).
476.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
I think it's more a continuation of IDE versus pure editor. More precisely: In one side, it's the "tools that build up critical mass" philosophy. AI firmly resides here. On the other, it's the "all you need is
477.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
What do you mean by "mixed together"? PR#2 will show only what changed between dough and toppings. If you merge it, it will become part of PR#1. You turned the dependency into a single block. So, if you don't want to mix, you
478.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
That specific phrase is not load-bearing to my argument. It's just an sample of things AI enthusiasts say.
479.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
we stole the promethean fire humans won't have to work again the spark of intelligence is now living in machines by the way, we still have to make small annoying interruptions to digital content to display ads, everything falls apart i
480.
by gaigalas 11mo ago
PR#1: dough PR#2: toppings You first send PR#1, then PR#2 on top of the first one. The diff for PR#1 will show dough stuff. The diff for PR#2 will show toppings in relation to dough. People can review them asynchronously. If you merge PR#1,

More ›