martin-t

17 ms·

181.
by martin-t 8mo ago
What is the underlying problem and what are the potential solutions? > saw dynamic+direct democracy as extremely dangerous Are you saying that humans, on average, are bad/harmful/evil? Or that they commit to decisions without t
182.
by martin-t 8mo ago
> real-time LLM-generated summaries Please no, LLMs have been shown to introduce biases from training data into the generated "summaries". LLMs should go nowhere public policy.
183.
by martin-t 8mo ago
I think the discussion should move away from freedoms/rights to consent. Compare with rights in the physical world: - If I own a property, whether it's a house or plot of land, I can consent or not consent to other people being th
184.
by martin-t 9mo ago
The current crop of genML criticism is a false dichotomy. People either focus on the models not meeting their standards (which is very subject matter dependent) or being exploitative. The thing is, both can be true at the same time and the
185.
by martin-t 9mo ago
> usually my agents directly read the source code of libraries that don't have lots of good documentation That only works if the source is available. And since software licenses are meaningless now, we might see more and more closed
186.
by martin-t 9mo ago
Have you heard about "run or raise" scripts/utilities? I have each program i use regularly bound to a keyboard shortcut and the search bar is ctrl+k in most browsers. If we're talking purely about the time saving of not
187.
by martin-t 9mo ago
> Both statements can be true. Sure. I mentioned it because some people have been pretty hostile to the idea that IP should protect people. They argued as if a technology that makes human innovation obsolete should automatically invalida
188.
by martin-t 9mo ago
Whenever I say this, I am told the goal of copyright is to incentivize innovation, not protect creators. So it doesn't matter if every particular person is truly rewarded for their work or if the rewarded person is the one doing the ac
189.
by martin-t 9mo ago
To be honest, these models being bad is what gives me some hope we can figure out how to approach a potential future AI as a society before it arrives. Because right now everything in the west is structured around rich people owning things
190.
by martin-t 9mo ago
Working on AI for a company he doesn't own is the stupidest thing a smart person can do. The goal is his work is to literally reduce the value of his work. He gets finite reward (even if above market average), then is fired, while owne
191.
by martin-t 9mo ago
This just shows that the models (not AI, statistical models of text used without consent) are not that smart, it's the tooling around them which allows using these models as a heuristic for brute force search of the solution space. Jus
192.
by martin-t 9mo ago
Anybody here read Coding machines? There's this implied trust we all have in the AI companies that the models are either not sufficiently powerful to form a working takeover plan or that they're sufficiently aligned to not try. An
193.
by martin-t 9mo ago
> A happier future is one with humans in control over their own tools and their own livelihoods. People should own the product of their work and owning companies should be illegal. Every good product starts as somebody's weekend pro
194.
by martin-t 9mo ago
> Our values are irrelevant to the wider population. This is the saddest part. Things are getting worse for everyone and most people just don't care. They are either ignorant or accept it as inevitable. I see 2 issues: 1) People don
195.
by martin-t 9mo ago
Because the optimum is a public process which proves their guilt beyond reasonable doubt so that every good person supports their punishment and has the confidence (certainty of guilt) to support it publicly. But if the choice is between no
196.
by martin-t 9mo ago
That's a good point. Perhaps a better statistic would be people who want to emigrate or immigrate. We're introducing a bias by measuring only those who actually do.
197.
by martin-t 9mo ago
> The accused are punished, sometimes even executed, without anything resembling due process. I also don't like this but I wonder, if this is because the choice is between a) full punishment with less certainty of guilt now b) lenie
198.
by martin-t 9mo ago
I didn't say a lynchmob, why do people always assume a bad implementation? Obviously, if you intend to abduct ("imprison") or kill ("execute") somebody as punishment, then you should have very high certainty they de
199.
by martin-t 9mo ago
1) Not sneering at it but everything has a cost. If authoritarians get the impression that all their past offenses will be forgiven if they hold everyone hostage and negotiate well, then there's no risk for them. And it's disrespe
200.
by martin-t 9mo ago
One good metric of quality of life (which includes various freedoms) is how many people emigrate or immigrate. Anybody who defends authoritarians has to explain why so many people want to leave and why the regime wants to keep them in. (Wit
201.
by martin-t 9mo ago
Dustpile of history, sure, but gallows first. Bleeding out on the pavement is also acceptable. Way too often, connected ("powerful") people manage to escape proper punishment, sometimes in the name of a "peaceful transition o
202.
by martin-t 9mo ago
> After all, demand has a hard ceiling at 24 hours per day. I agree consumption is capped. I constantly struggle with whether to watch a given video or read a given article. I have an ever increasing to-watch and to-read list and unfortu
203.
by martin-t 9mo ago
1) I appreciate that you differentiate between legality and morality, many people sadly don't. 2) re "hoot": You can say "fuck" here. You've been rudely dismissive twice now, yet you use a veil of politeness. I
204.
by martin-t 10mo ago
I don't think copyright should be binary or should work the way it does not. It's just the only tool we have now. There should be a system which protects all work (intellectual and physical) and makes sure the people doing it get
205.
by martin-t 10mo ago
> or said something in an off-putting way It shouldn't matter. Currently, downvote means "I want this to be ranked lower". There really should be 2 options "factually incorrect" and "disagree". For peop
206.
by martin-t 10mo ago
I argue primarily about morality (right and wrong), not legality. The argument is valid morally, if LLM companies found a loophole ion the law, it should be closed.
207.
by martin-t 10mo ago
The thing is a model trained on the same input as current models except Quake and Quake derivatives would not generate such code. (You'd have to prompt it with descriptions of quake physics since it wouldn't know what you mean,
208.
by martin-t 10mo ago
Tragedy of the commons. If all software had (compatible) clauses about permitted usage, then the choice would be to rewrite it inhouse or accept the restrictions. When there are alternatives (copyleft or permissive) which are not significan
209.
by martin-t 10mo ago
> The totalitarian government wouldn’t care about your license anyway. I see this a lot and while being technically correct, I think it ignores the costs for them. In practice such a government doesn't need to have laws and courts e
210.
by martin-t 10mo ago
I think it would be most interesting to find ways to restrict bad usage without crippling the positive impact. Douglas Crockford[0] tried this with JSON. Now, strictly speaking, this does not satisfy the definition of Open Source (it merely

More ›