mpalmer

15 ms·

241.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
> There really isn't anything special to using AI anyways it's not rocket science Could have fooled me, the way some people manage to confuse themselves with it
242.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Hey, thanks for responding. I guess I used the prototype then. Definitely don't remember anyone saying "this is a prototype" at the time, so I took the product at face value, and part of the reason I chose it was the fzf supp
243.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
I was already turned off by their decision to remove support for fzf, which I use everywhere else. I'm done.
244.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
As a citizen of one of these backsliders, in addition to voting in every election I'm allowed to, I am committing to taking additional civic action in the next few months to advocate for free and fair elections. I hope everyone in a si
245.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
The most positive outcome I can think of is one where computers get really good at doing, and humans get really good at thinking Steve Yegge said on some podcast recently that AI is going to have to come up with a more visual medi
246.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Then surely "little bit depressing this is still how we do things" is equally unwelcome
247.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
For my part at least, I get the most riled up against the binary thinkers!
248.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
I do not think "AI coding" - as distinct from the human who drives it - is gambling. More like a delayed footgun for the uneducated. I don't mean that disparagingly, but I do mean it literally. I’ve certainly been spend
249.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
You are either an unthinking contrarian, or you care deeply about the continued legality of Polymarket specifically, because your responses to the points being made against you are inane. "you're talking about death threats, those
250.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Sorry you are clearly not engaging in good faith, I'm done
251.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Amen. "Growth" is literally product cancer
252.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
"Asking AI" is doing a lot of work there. The people who pay for Kagi do so for very specific reasons, often because they know what "asking AI" really means for their privacy.
253.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
On the other hand, it doesn't monetize any of the data you give. Six of one, half dozen of the other, yeah? Re: image gen... it's a search engine. Why would I need my refrigerator to toast my bread?
254.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
You haven't thought too hard about it then; Kagi is (in part) looking to get better margins on its AI spend here.
255.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Was the "J" short for "Cassandra"? When someone says "I want a programming language in which I need only say what I wish done," give him a lollipop.
256.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Not my experience so your exaggeration doesn't really help make your point.
257.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
I mean... it's not a microblogging service, or even Github. Think of the resources you are marshaling and tapping into when you request Opus inference. Think of the statefulness of the systems necessary to manage prompt caching. Not
258.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
What you're showing me is a [war crime], which has existed for time in humans. [Wars] of all kinds have existed for a long time and haven't been banned. Banning on [particular tactics in war] altogether and pushin
259.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Do you pay LLM providers for agentic features? From your past submissions, you certainly seem to. Do those features make web searches and curl the results? Were the models underlying those features trained on all available web content, or
260.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Everyone has to answer for themselves why they would be OK with Google hoovering up their data in order to deliver substandard results, vs Kagi actively working to remove low-quality results all while collecting no personal data.
261.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
No, the responses are backed by searches.
262.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Yeah, clearly it makes you FIGHT the news
263.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
I'm not responding to your gish gallop BS. Why do you (obviously) think betting markets are good?
264.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Defeatist nonsense, and wrong. The US was regulating this until Trump. A friendly regulatory environment is the only way paying out these bets at scale is possible. "Pushing it underground" discourages the majority of bettors from
265.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Do you have a positive defense of betting markets? You're spraying defensive whataboutism all over this thread and lowering the discourse. > Prediction Markets you don't have to participate, so no harm done. Harm: https:/
266.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Why do you apparently like a system that lets people bet on atrocities and then take steps to make said atrocities more likely?
267.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
I truly don't know how you wake up, read this story with your morning coffee, and go to work at a company like this.
268.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
The headline is telling. Book judged by cover. This is a Gemini deep research response that someone ran through some kind of shortening prompt. They even kept all the footnotes. It used to be that startups would run blogs that did technical
269.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
I think it's only fair to ask how you would apply that quote to your own preferred conventions.
270.
by mpalmer 7mo ago
Soon, we’ll use semantically vague human language, to prompt, cajole, nudge LLM agents to produce programs that are (lossy) statistical approximations of what might be correct programs. That seems vanishingly unlikely next to the

More ›