godelski

52 ms·

721.
by godelski 9mo ago
Sometimes at the bottom of reviews they mention a lot more products than appeared in the main review. Not always though. Not disagreeing with the decline in reliability but just stating because this can be easy to miss and when it is done I
722.
by godelski 9mo ago
Reminds me of Quanta's egregious article Physicists Create a Holographic Wormhole Using a Quantum Computer [0], a blatant ad for CalTech/Harvard/MIT. One where even an article posted the same day by the NYT[1] quoted Scott
723.
by godelski 9mo ago
I think you forgot the part where you offer advice. I hope your students get more instruction than your credentials
724.
by godelski 9mo ago
That's a very strong claim. I don't think people expect their circuits to ignite, LLM instruction or not. But I'd expect learning from a book or dedicated website would be less likely for that to occur. (Even accounting for b
725.
by godelski 9mo ago
> Sure but they will often make comments or tests that aren't actually useful, or modify tests to succeed instead of fixing the code. I've been deeply concerned that there's been a rise of TDD. I thought we already
726.
by godelski 9mo ago
> They don't take shortcuts or resort to ugly hacks. My experience is quite different > They have no problem writing tedious guards against edge cases that humans brush off. Ditto. I have a hard time getting them
727.
by godelski 9mo ago
Is there more context to this? I'm assuming Ben is experimenting and demonstrating the danger of vibe circuit designing? Mostly because I know he has a ton of experience and I'd expect him to not make this mistake (also seems like
728.
by godelski 9mo ago
What's your point? The AI is being sold as an expert, not a student. These are categorically different things. The mistake in the post is one that can be avoided by taking a single class at a community college. No PhD required, not eve
729.
by godelski 9mo ago
Honestly, landing on the page is a bit confusing. On Firefox I have to click and hold before anything happens and it is inconsistent. Seems to help by moving my mouse. The legend is quite large and causes it to overlap with the graph. I thi
730.
by godelski 9mo ago
Fwiw I'm not trying to celebrate for OpenAI. The press piece definitely makes bolder claims than the paper. I was just stating the facts and correcting a reaction that went too far in the other direction. By taking my comment as suppor
731.
by godelski 9mo ago
> Am I getting that right? My comment was in response to the claim I responded to. Any inference you have made about my feelings about OpenAI are that of your own. You can search my comment history if you want to verify or reject
732.
by godelski 9mo ago
> To be clear, I don't think coming up with relativity was "in distribution" based on the results of the time. This is difficult to infer from the context of the conversation. > only believe that (1) if it h
733.
by godelski 9mo ago
> Critique of absolute time and space of Newtonian physics was already well underway This only means Einstein was not alone, it does not mean the results were in distribution. > Many of the phenomena that relativity would
734.
by godelski 9mo ago
> Can humans actually do that? Yes Seriously, think about it for a second... If that were true then science should have accelerated a lot faster. Science would have happened differently and researchers would have optimized to tr
735.
by godelski 9mo ago
They also reference Parke and Taylor. Several times...
736.
by godelski 9mo ago
> I think this was all already figured out in 1986 though They cite that paper in the third paragraph... Naively, the n-gluon scattering amplitude involves order n! terms. Famously, for the special case of MHV (maximally heli
737.
by godelski 9mo ago
> Early we should see huge chunky contributions and bursts. Loc means things are being realized. There is nothing more permanent than a temporary fix that works. This is a common way for tech debt to build. You're right that
738.
by godelski 9mo ago
> Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours. It is very similar to Feynman's The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be
739.
by godelski 9mo ago
Asimov and Feynman also spoke about similar things (along with many others) In 1980, Asimov famously wrote The Cult of Ignorance [0], criticizing the rise of anti-intellectualism. Where there was a strong political push of "don't
740.
by godelski 9mo ago
I agree. I say more here[0] and think the inability to face your accusers is not only unconstitutional but inhumane. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46984602
741.
by godelski 9mo ago
Truthfully, things like uBlock are digital protests. They look different than people marching in a street but they are organized and pushing back against the oppression. But it does look different and isn't as extreme as a riot.
742.
by godelski 9mo ago
Why should they pay?[0] You point to the market but these market giants gain a lot of their stature from the free and open work done by others. The market is not the decider of the value of utility. If it was we'd not hear about donati
743.
by godelski 9mo ago
> Seems like industry insiders passing responsibility for their bad practices on to consumers really means they want consumers to stay divided. I think this is why they also encourage the old trope of "It's not just &
744.
by godelski 9mo ago
> users need to act for themselves and optimize their own privacy. In some sense I agree, but I also think you've oversimplified things. Even when you're highly technically skilled it can be extremely difficult to impos
745.
by godelski 9mo ago
> The headline makes it sound uniquely sinister, but [it's not] Does this matter? TikTok is one of the, if not the, most popular apps in the US and the world[0]. It makes sense to talk about the biggest offenders . You&#x27
746.
by godelski 9mo ago
> to appear just to people. The best way to appear just is to be just. But I'm not sure what your argument is. It is our duty as citizens to encourage the system to be just. Since there is no concrete mathematical obje
747.
by godelski 9mo ago
IANAL. One thing I like to say is There is no rule that can be written so precisely that there are no exceptions, including this one. A joke[0], but one I think people should take seriously. Law would be easy if it weren't for a
748.
by godelski 9mo ago
Luckily on linux you an bring that back! First, install `misfortune`. Then write this small script that starts after the bash screen for i in {1..80} do notify-send "Winblows" "$(misfortune") done If you
749.
by godelski 9mo ago
> I know we instinctively want to frame this as a privacy problem I think it is, but I think this is a more fundamental level of privacy than most people are thinking of when they think of privacy > In "good" tim
750.
by godelski 9mo ago
This is essentially the literacy component of a Lennon market (which the parent essentially described). Where the consumer can't differentiate a lemon from a peach, only a tad more abstract. The customer has an implicit assumption that

More ›