gruez

30 ms·

841.
by gruez 5mo ago
>My use case would primarily be in search, integration, and indexing other software projects with my own, as well as transcription/indexing of interesting video and audio content (eg Dwarkesh interviews) that I don’t have time to wa
842.
by gruez 5mo ago
>The Nova classification system isn't based on the number of processing steps, it's based on ingredients. So going back to the quote, is the potato chips vs yogurt example accurate? >That false claim is based on the fact tha
843.
by gruez 5mo ago
If we're talking about targeted hacks, are we sure the US doesn't do this? Is US soil off limits for hacks somehow? What plausible exploits could be done when someone is on US soil, but not over the internet, especially on modern
844.
by gruez 5mo ago
You don't "have to", but they can deport you and refuse entry in the future in retaliation. It's a variant of the TSA not being able to "compel" you to a search, but they can refuse you from flying.
845.
by gruez 5mo ago
>For GDPR reasons alone it's probably not a good idea to take a business phone across certain borders. You run the risk of disclosing customer data to a 3rd party, if only because the customer data in your phone book counts as PII.
846.
by gruez 5mo ago
>Adb backup exists, though I haven't tried it, It's very patchy, and many (most?) apps opt out, so it's functionally useless.
847.
by gruez 5mo ago
>Going to China means your devices are owned when the plane touches down if not before. ??? Are American made operating systems (Android, iOS, Windows, Mac) so full of 0days that the Chinese are burning them on random travelers? This jus
848.
by gruez 5mo ago
>> I had thought (and Supreme Court ruled) you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device >Does that apply to non-citizens? If a CBP officer doesn't like you as a non-citizen, like your lack of cooperation during an
849.
by gruez 5mo ago
>China installs malware to spy on you. The US doesn't do this. Source? Are we talking on random travelers, or targeted individuals? I seriously doubt china is doing the former, and I also seriously doubt the US doesn't engage i
850.
by gruez 5mo ago
>If you can do what you need with qwen3.6-27b, it starts to look really interesting. What's the use case here? Churning out massive amounts of slop code through autonomous agents? Running openclaw 24/7? I think the proliferatio
851.
by gruez 5mo ago
The objection isn't over whether "ultra-processed foods" as a group tend to be unhealthy, it's that the classification is not rigorous, and conflates what's actually unhealthy or not with an heuristic that's at
852.
by gruez 5mo ago
>Among other mechanisms, refining removes nutrients and other beneficial molecules, while purifying taste and reducing volume making it easier to overeat. Should we cancel vaccines and water purification while we're at it? It's
853.
by gruez 5mo ago
>These random bloggers/influencers speaking from self-proclaimed high ground is in large part how we got in this mess. There are a gazillion people out there who know how to say the right things, to get the right minds, the click th
854.
by gruez 5mo ago
With only 32gb of vram, you can only run small/quantized models, in which case what's the point? At $4000, that gets you 20 months of 10x claude or chagpt subscriptions, which provide far better models. You'd need some use ca
855.
by gruez 5mo ago
>There is no moat in the model. What's the "moat" in giving models away for free? Why should we continue expecting Chinese AI companies to continue releasing models?
856.
by gruez 5mo ago
From wikipedia: >Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem ('an argument to the person'), refers to when a speaker attacks the character, motive , or some other attribute of the person m
857.
by gruez 5mo ago
Ad homniems aside, is the accusation even accurate? So far as I can tell he doesn't obviously have "a massive financial incentive to do so", like he's a VC investor in anthropic or whatever. He does seem to be bullish on
858.
by gruez 5mo ago
>The gap between productivity and wages is striking, isn't it? It's not. The (in)famous epi.org is flawed for all sorts of reasons, from excluding noproduction/supervisory workers (the highest compensated ones!), to exclud
859.
by gruez 5mo ago
>why a wealth tax is needed the whole "buy, borrow, die" thing [...] see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48239802 Moreover if the bug is that income isn't tax at death, why not just fix that bug? Ot
860.
by gruez 5mo ago
>Well for a start it pressurises asset holders to sell their assets. Even assuming this is true, then what? Do you think the average joe is going to suddenly buy alphabet or meta stocks because bill ackman or ken griffin sold their share
861.
by gruez 5mo ago
>Since it is economic fact rather than self-serving fiction [...] You deride the weak justification for trickle down economics, then proceed to link wtfhappenedin1971.com, a site that tries to argue for the reintroduction of the gold sta
862.
by gruez 5mo ago
>Even if they collectively only release a new model every few years for the sake of influence and public image, that's plenty enough to keep the competitive aspect going. This is unpersuasive. Why would AI companies (American or Chi
863.
by gruez 5mo ago
>The labs have a perverse incentive to make things as expensive compute wise as possible. The only thing keeping this somewhat in check is competition, but it's intentionally being gatekept by locking up the supply of computing infr
864.
by gruez 5mo ago
>so they place much more emphasis on compute-efficiency. Maybe on training, but on inference they use more tokens than comparable western models. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?output-tokens=intelligence-vs...
865.
by gruez 5mo ago
>The latest deepseek v4 pro model is 2-5x cheaper than Claude Sonnet 4.6. Cursor's Compose 2.5 that was just recently released is 6x cheaper than Sonnet. It's ironic how in a thread about "AI subsidies" that people do
866.
by gruez 5mo ago
Yeah wtf? If programming becomes a generic white collar job, it's not really accurate to characterize the people as "those in it for the love of the craft". After all, do you think the average accountant or analyst is doing i
867.
by gruez 5mo ago
>which is how GitLab is like 5x larger than Valve. Seems questionable to compare the valuation of a public company vs a private one, with the latter being marked to market rarely, if ever.
868.
by gruez 5mo ago
What actually changed?
869.
by gruez 5mo ago
That just continues a tradition of moving the goalposts for "AI" to just beyond what's currently possible.
870.
by gruez 5mo ago
>I don't believe there will ever be any artificial intelligence, ... Sounds like you're talking about AGI, not AI. AI is here today.

More ›