glenstein

3 ms·

1.
by glenstein 7d ago
My read was that they were also disagreeing with it (and I personally disagree with it too for exactly the reasons you mention). But the problem in this case isn't just that it's right or wrong, it's that it at least belongs
2.
by glenstein 7d ago
>By many people’s criteria it automatically is worse, because part of what they value in art is thinking about the artist and their intentions behind their creation. I think that's true enough for what it is but, as the other commen
3.
by glenstein 7d ago
One version of this I really loved was some viral clip that I believe was like a local newscast where one guy who really seemed to dislike vegan products was challenged to tell the difference between a real meat product and a vegan alternat
4.
by glenstein 7d ago
I see what you mean, but I think you can draw (no pun intended) a distinction between trope following and having a skill, or at least should notionally be able to.
5.
by glenstein 7d ago
There's an amazing viral twitter thread where someone claimed a real Monet painting was an AI generated imitation, and it got an avalanche of comments from people who claimed it was an obvious fake and a poor imitation at that. It&#x27
6.
by glenstein 7d ago
>The problem with these is not so much that they’re bad. They’re OK, I don’t love them. The problem is that once you’ve seen that style 20 times it starts to irritate just from the sheer repetition. This is one of the better statements o
7.
by glenstein 7d ago
Uh, yes. It's overzealous because personally disagreeing with something doesn't mean that it's outside the scope of the subject matter that the article is speaking to. If anything, you're reaffirming the commonalities be
8.
by glenstein 7d ago
I think the trouble is once your category is loosey-goosey enough it could be open-ended to the point that anything can fit it. The fact that overall of recorded history you can find instances of any sort of interaction with something that&
9.
by glenstein 7d ago
I mean I definitely disagree with the book's argument, and you're right that it's making a different argument than the article, but I think straight up declaring it irrelevant is coming in way too hot. It's also an arg
10.
by glenstein 10d ago
I remember the days when people justified Google Chrome's maximalist RAM usage by saying it was a good thing because it was allocating what the program actually needed to run quickly and efficiently, and it was better to grab what it a
11.
by glenstein 10d ago
I mean encryption is a real thing (Edward Snowden sometimes would simply say "Encryption works" in online Q and As) and there are ways to do zero knowledge data crunching Eleven while interacting with servers. Kim DotCom famously
12.
by glenstein 10d ago
This is the confidently incorrect narrative that gets repeated in the comment sections practically every time Mozilla is mentioned but it's every bit as incorrect now as it's been all the previous times. So here we go again for th
13.
by glenstein 10d ago
I suppose some clarity would have been nice but I try to err on the side of charitable interpretation with these things, especially with how much MDS there tends to be in the hn comment sections. This does just seem to be like a high level
14.
by glenstein 10d ago
They certainly seem to be implying it. And not only that, disinformation narratives often to to emphasize domestic political troubles that fan the flames of skepticism against mainstream institutions, and their reply to a topic about Russia
15.
by glenstein 11d ago
Maybe the title was changed, but the current title does not reference a Hugging Face attack.
16.
by glenstein 11d ago
This is a completely all over the place gish gallop. Both can be true: there's real reporting on acts of sabotage that aren't made up, and there are domestic tensions happening independently of that. The skill is keeping both thin
17.
by glenstein 11d ago
The similarity is also timing and geopolitical context. It doesn't have to be an identical method to merit the comparison as the means for sabotage can be variable. Of course more similarity would be a stronger signal, but we shouldn&#
18.
by glenstein 12d ago
I would recommend working on control over your attention. You've gone from saying negative reaction was "heavily astroturfed" to acknowledging he should not be doing this and you've gone from that to drifting into first
19.
by glenstein 12d ago
You would have to imagine that a big shareholder being able to neutralize ordinary functions of the board is outside, at a minimum, the spirit of that intended process. Though I'm sure that can be argued sixteen different directions.
20.
by glenstein 12d ago
If you're coming to this late you may be missing the history, which is that Wordpress seemed to abuse every power at its disposal to force a third party company out of its ecosystem unless they "paid up", a demand associated
21.
by glenstein 12d ago
He also may simply be an outright majority shareholder himself (he said he owns 84% of the company in 2024) and able to easily and unilaterally replace the board.
22.
by glenstein 12d ago
I think most people aren't reading the article and are not appreciating how insane this story is. But you're right the whole thing I could barely believe what was happening there.
23.
by glenstein 12d ago
Right it's more like open defiance of a board decision that the board hasn't yet decided how to respond to. And in the meantime we don't know if the statements about him being back are official or just him going rogue. But a
24.
by glenstein 12d ago
Seems like nobody is actually reading the TFA which is a shame because what the article describes is truly mind boggling: >However, the board’s plan did not go smoothly. Seemingly declining to depart, Mullenweg booted other admins out of
25.
by glenstein 14d ago
Right, and the context of this conversation was about the paid cheating industry not about the continuum.
26.
by glenstein 15d ago
>It's always been my understanding that virtually everyone cheats I'm sure it's prevalent in absolute numbers but I didn't and the vast majority of people I know in college didn't. I think it exists in pockets an
27.
by glenstein 15d ago
Then don't take my comment as directed toward that example. Charitable interpretation for the win.
28.
by glenstein 15d ago
I think this is a two things can be true situation, where our colloquial meaning of coding is not quite adequate to indicate the full range of criteria that really matter, but also, that criteria as a totality (maintainability, reliability
29.
by glenstein 16d ago
As ever, identifying danger exclusively with human willpower and detaching it from means at their disposal commits you to absurdities where butter knives, guns, and AGI are indistinguishable risks. So, I agree entirely with the article, tho
30.
by glenstein 16d ago
>Agent-2, more so than previous models, is effectively “online learning,” in that it’s built to never really finish training. Every day, the weights get updated to the latest version, trained on more data generated by the previous versio

More ›