monkpit

3 ms·

1.
by monkpit 6d ago
The point is that it doesn’t matter, they enjoyed it. The fun police weren’t invited to do an investigation, no matter what scenario or analogy is applied. Saying “you didn’t like it right” is gatekeeping.
2.
by monkpit 6d ago
The analogy to a book doesn’t fit anyways. The closest thing would be telling someone they’re reading a choose-your-own-adventure book wrong somehow, and even then it’s a stretch.
3.
by monkpit 6d ago
Why announce that you’re incapable of allowing someone to hold an opinion that doesn’t match yours? Would it be so wrong for someone to enjoy something in a different way than you do? Or should they be chastised for enjoying it the wrong wa
4.
by monkpit 7d ago
Or cyber…
5.
by monkpit 10d ago
404?
6.
by monkpit 10d ago
To be fair - you’re crafting a deliberately bad model input for a contrived example.
7.
by monkpit 10d ago
Why can’t someone else have a different opinion than you, even if it doesn’t make sense to you?
8.
by monkpit 11d ago
Are you hooking it up to blender via some MCP or are you just creating files and opening in blender?
9.
by monkpit 12d ago
Intent might be what’s being discussed but intent is, for the most part, legally irrelevant. It might make the difference in the degree of a murder charge, or maybe manslaughter, or criminal negligence, but it doesn’t get you off the hook.
10.
by monkpit 14d ago
IMO the argument about anthropomorphizing misses the point - what most comments that talk about anthropomorphizing really want to talk about is accountability. It’s impossible to hold an LLM accountable, and in rare cases where people do (t
11.
by monkpit 15d ago
There are old mushroom hunters and there are bold mushroom hunters but there are no old bold mushroom hunters.
12.
by monkpit 17d ago
This is my question too. If we are all just going “well that sucks” after AI solves this problem, why did anyone care about the problem being solved in the first place? Is the bummer that we got a solution we didn’t want - that navier-stoke
13.
by monkpit 17d ago
To what end?
14.
by monkpit 17d ago
Have people done that? Or are they just meat puppets?
15.
by monkpit 23d ago
> Holden ran down the runway, narrowly missing a crossing fuel bowser TIL Bowser is an actual word, huh.
16.
by monkpit 23d ago
Would you care to discuss the topic, or just throw grenades? Surely you can come up with something more substantive than this
17.
by monkpit 23d ago
You’d expect that, wouldn’t you? But, alas…
18.
by monkpit 23d ago
Would be cool if there was a benchmark to evaluate the “tool-like” quality of a model - its capability to quickly, cheaply, accurately, do exactly as it is asked.
19.
by monkpit 24d ago
> Considering they put Opus 5 (High) at the same level as Fable 5 (Max), I don't trust it that much. Have you used both? I’ve never experienced any seemingly greater level of intelligence from Fable 5 over Opus.
20.
by monkpit 24d ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bird_leg_and_pelvic_girdl... A bit more direct
21.
by monkpit 26d ago
Depression
22.
by monkpit 27d ago
That’s the implication with any of these mmo stories, really - they’re addictive by nature
23.
by monkpit 1mo ago
Not OP, but dependency management, for one.
24.
by monkpit 1mo ago
Not to mention the idea in the article has kinda been beaten to death
25.
by monkpit 1mo ago
No, don’t be silly, they get ai to spy on you en masse instead. Nobody has to look at anything anymore for it to be actionable.
26.
by monkpit 1mo ago
> ET_ADD trusted the compiler, and PEP 749 quietly handed user code a way to break that trust Sigh, and I quietly closed the article as it was quietly written by AI. That’s not just lazy — that’s uninteresting. And it’s more uninterestin
27.
by monkpit 1mo ago
> If they all quit everybody else would be better off. Look, I get where you’re going, but if you think about what would _actually_ happen, it would definitely be much worse if they suddenly had to rehire the majority of the force.
28.
by monkpit 1mo ago
It implies that these two should be directly related without acknowledging any other contributing factors. It’s implying “overtime is a function of staffing, staffing went up so overtime should go down”. What if the population went up? What
29.
by monkpit 1mo ago
> […] even when department staffing increased, overtime continued to go up. From 2011 to 2024, staffing increased by nearly 9%. Over the same period, overtime went up by almost 200%. The data in this article is good, but this piece is re
30.
by monkpit 1mo ago
Would you put up with that at your own job? They’d just all quit and the problem would be worse than before.

More ›