pear01

6 ms·

31.
by pear01 5mo ago
This is an interesting answer for questions about human agency and accountability/personhood questions but I don't see how it leads to increased confidence in the role of human as SWE. If LLMs get good enough, one might be tempted
32.
by pear01 5mo ago
This is temporary. What is the SKILL.md equivalent going to be in five years? In ten? You don't already see a pattern emerging around solutions to encode that "professional experience" into the tools themselves? These LLMs ca
33.
by pear01 5mo ago
Let's also not forget a lot of the market edge of SWEs comes in knowing how to navigate these parts. The fact you needed to be reasonably fluent in a language was already a barrier to entry which meant in better times new grads could e
34.
by pear01 5mo ago
Qualified immunity is a stain on American jurisprudence and an insult to the idea of America as a free society. Demand of people who want your vote in the coming elections that they support a legislative correction to this judicial activism
35.
by pear01 5mo ago
Don't use your laptop. Or your phone. It's owned by a corporation. Do you hear yourself? If you don't want to rely on corporations go live in the woods.
36.
by pear01 5mo ago
It's an adversarial economy. Using a LLM at work doesn't mean the work is challenging. A lot of jobs are "bullshit jobs". People are using LLMs because it gives them back time. If they don't use it their colleague w
37.
by pear01 5mo ago
They will never release them. The distraction will morph into all the electoral subterfuge they will attempt as they increasingly fear losing power at the polls. They know what's in those files and what will happen to them if they lose
38.
by pear01 5mo ago
It may be a bad idea (for various reasons), but it is one already being floated. Here is a press release just today from a California congressman who is proposing a bill to this effect. https://sherman.house.gov/media-center
39.
by pear01 5mo ago
In such a situation - especially heading into the midterms - an export ban may be increasingly probable.
40.
by pear01 5mo ago
My comment was unclear. That quote was intended to connect with the parent claim that Polymarket was unique in "trying to dodge US federal regulations". The chain was: > I don't get it. Most companies registered in the sta
41.
by pear01 5mo ago
Because it's not illegal to be a "douchebag". I don't believe in mob rule. You proudly declare things illegal with all the confidence of someone who has never been a victim of the state's power. You must have a rath
42.
by pear01 5mo ago
You may feel that way, and I may sympathize. But I really think you are over-indexing on your own personal belief that they are "bad for the country". If we follow your logic then a company is doing more _dodging_ simply on the ba
43.
by pear01 5mo ago
Polymarket is already working on a full return to the US market aided by sympathetic policy changes of the current administration. Additionally, the claim "most of the companies registered in Delaware are not trying to dodge US federal
44.
by pear01 5mo ago
This would be more convincing if a single car had been exchanged for $1. It didn't happen. Seems the bug was "contained". Sort of undermines your point re "catastrophic business failure" don't you think?
45.
by pear01 5mo ago
This would be a more convincing take if reasoning LLMs didn't already exist. Given the growth in capability over the last few years alone nothing about your description "several minute explanation of how the item description and t
46.
by pear01 5mo ago
You forgot a big one in your description of the hypothetical advantages: No free will
47.
by pear01 5mo ago
> Totally understood on the feedback [...] we are grateful for their support So are you going to donate to them or not?
48.
by pear01 5mo ago
And? What strawman are you attacking? No one disputed that pragmatic concern. How did Cotton's viral line of questioning help clarify if or how the CEO was "vulnerable to PRC pressure"? Should American CEOs who do business in
49.
by pear01 5mo ago
Sorry, I simply don't know what point you are making. If you are trying to propose some alternative system that is one thing. I'm merely clarifying that your statement does not make sense in the context of the system we already ha
50.
by pear01 5mo ago
a cross examination or a congressional hearing is not a university lecture. would you like your liberty to be at risk just so a judge or a senator can satisfy their curiosity at your expense? do you have any idea what the penalties can be f
51.
by pear01 5mo ago
What is the American ethnicity? Should all other ethnicities be subjected to the same round of questioning before the United States Congress? I'm not sure why you are defending Tom Cotton's intelligence. Rule #1 of asking question
52.
by pear01 5mo ago
i understand that perfectly, which is why i responded sarcastically to a point trying to connect this to TikTok's "argument" re their Singaporean CEO by pasting an infamous digression on that very topic. seems to have gone ov
53.
by pear01 5mo ago
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR): So you said today, as you often say that you live in Singapore. Of what nation are you a citizen? Shou Chew: Singapore. Cotton: Are you a citizen of any other nation? Chew: No, Senator. Cotton: Have you ever applied
54.
by pear01 7mo ago
While I broadly agree with this characterization, it is somewhat inaccurate. > the same powerful interests who chose to put a lunatic in charge. I don't think this is accurate as a fact of recent history. As I recall, said interests
55.
by pear01 7mo ago
I wasn't talking to single issue republicans... I didn't take the OP to be one, and I (like you) would not waste much time on one. The point I was trying to make is Democrats can elect and nominate better candidates. But let'
56.
by pear01 7mo ago
Why are you appending a sentence I never said within your quote of my position? Your comment reads like you are arguing with yourself. I never suggested anything to the contrary of much of what you write, so frankly I have no idea what poin
57.
by pear01 7mo ago
Is this supposed to be an intelligent comment? Is your answer to forgo elections ahead of time? You plan for the worst outcome by already accepting it as reality? Why don't you work on lobbying your grandparents and their vote because
58.
by pear01 7mo ago
It's not that complicated. Elect a Democrat in 2028 who will nominate a strong AG, not a useless ditherer like Garland. What a disgraceful tenure he had. If he was going to take so long to bring charges he should have just avoided it.
59.
by pear01 7mo ago
This is not the history of politics. Movements that ignore the need for a charismatic leader fail, often spectacularly. It's why for example occupy wallstreet was such a laughable failure. Who was its leader? Is the human megaphone a s
60.
by pear01 7mo ago
> LLMs don't second-guess whether a change is worth submitting, and they certainly don't feel the social pressure of how their contribution might be received. The filter is completely absent. Of course you could have an agent o

More ›