jstanley

31 ms·

601.
Aardvark'd: 12 Weeks With Geeks [video](youtube.com)
3 points by jstanley 1y ago|0 comments
602.
Locality of Behaviour (2020)(htmx.org)
111 points by jstanley 1y ago|62 comments
603.
by jstanley 1y ago
I'm not saying you can get a perfect map, I'm saying the territory exists. I don't think we really disagree. Other than that if you compare 2 possible future timelines, you can either pick a favourite in which case that one h
604.
by jstanley 1y ago
The entire universe is like chess. Yes your opponent can make a move and you don't know what move they'll make. Chess is like that too. I'm not saying this is in fact a good way to win a physical fight. I'm also not sayi
605.
by jstanley 1y ago
Yes. The territory has an optimal move. If your map is not good enough to identify it, that's a property of your map not of the territory.
606.
by jstanley 1y ago
Enumerate your possible moves. Evaluate your personal utility function over all possible future timelines of the universe, conditional on each of your possible moves. The move that has the highest score is the best move.
607.
The Story of Mel(users.cs.utah.edu)
1 points by jstanley 1y ago|0 comments
608.
Max, a Real Programmer(incoherency.co.uk)
9 points by jstanley 1y ago|0 comments
609.
by jstanley 1y ago
Just because you don't know what the best move is doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
610.
by jstanley 1y ago
> Go has sub-second build times even on massive code-bases. Unless you use sqlite, in which case your build takes a million years.
611.
by jstanley 1y ago
There are loads of things I don't support, mostly I don't bring them up in unrelated conversations.
612.
by jstanley 1y ago
I don't think blame was being apportioned.
613.
by jstanley 1y ago
But isn't the content of LessWrong part of the Great Conversation too?
614.
Locality of Behaviour (2020)(htmx.org)
1 points by jstanley 1y ago|0 comments
615.
by jstanley 1y ago
I think the comment says science doesn't matter for Apple , specifically.
616.
by jstanley 1y ago
Maybe, (I don't know), but it's easy to accidentally come up with a theory of "mysterious stuff" that appears to explain something, but neither constrains your expectation nor provides predictions. Phlogiston is the clas
617.
by jstanley 1y ago
Don't forget phlogiston.
618.
by jstanley 1y ago
Right. The error is in thinking that "just code and maths" can't reason. LLMs very obviously are reducible to "just code and maths". We know that, because that is how they are made.
619.
by jstanley 1y ago
> Show me the computations Just because computations exist that model a physical process to an arbitrary degree of accuracy doesn't mean we know what those computations are.
620.
by jstanley 1y ago
What part of an LLM do you think is not made out of code and maths?
621.
by jstanley 1y ago
The onus there is on the "make-text-nice" developer, not an eventual user of "make-text-nice".
622.
Should You Reverse Any Advice You Hear?(slatestarcodex.com)
1 points by jstanley 1y ago|0 comments
623.
by jstanley 1y ago
> based on the plethora of evidence Yep, this is fine. I'm not saying "don't believe anything you can't prove". I'm saying "don't believe everything you can't disprove". Believe based on
624.
by jstanley 1y ago
He didn't end the discussion, he presented evidence . When you receive updated evidence you should update your beliefs. He presented good evidence that big corporations are co-operating with the NSA, or something, but he didn't p
625.
by jstanley 1y ago
I don't understand how you got that. The question was about network calls that an OS would perform on its own.
626.
by jstanley 1y ago
> What would be an example of a necessary network call that an ideal OS [...] has to perform on its own? Syncing the clock with NTP?
627.
by jstanley 1y ago
> do we know some rogue process isnt vacuuming up your keystrokes? The standard for holding a belief isn't "can you prove it is not so?", but "on the balance of evidence, is it likely to be so?". If you believe e
628.
by jstanley 1y ago
The comment you replied to isn't saying that metadata isn't spying. It's saying that the spies generally don't have free access to content data.
629.
Anthropically Blind: the anthropic shadow is reflectively inconsistent (2023)(lesswrong.com)
2 points by jstanley 1y ago|0 comments
630.
by jstanley 1y ago
That's not obvious. It's obvious to you , because your definition of "art" requires it to be man-made. But you can't use the fact that non-man-made things can't be art to argue that non-man-made things can&#x2

More ›