phailhaus

5 ms·

31.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
Oh lord, yeah this convinces me even more that this is a bad idea. I can't even tell at a glance if those do the same thing. Just pick one and move on, you're requiring everyone to pass around sourcemaps literally everywhere they
32.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
Bash syntax is anything but simple or logical. Just look at the insane if-statement syntax. Or how the choice of quotes fundamentally changes behavior. Argument parsing, looping, the list goes on.
33.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
Those are both formatting examples though? You're suggesting totally different syntaxes , which means you can't even point to the same line in a codebase when talking about a PR. This throws up massive hurdles around communicatio
34.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
This is a Very Bad Idea. Two people working with the same language will be unable to reason about each other's code, because it requires understanding their bespoke syntax and its nuances.
35.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
I depend on the community to vet libraries that I add to my stack. The community of people . When I use AI to write code, I have absolutely no guarantee about what it just did, so I have to read through it all carefully.
36.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
I love TRMNL for this exact type of usecase! Only ~$150, and you can self-host if you want.
37.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
When I write the code myself, I'm not worried that I snuck a `git reset --hard` somewhere.
38.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
> Okay, so they did all that and then posted an apology blog almost right after ? Seems pretty strange. You mean double down on the hoax? That seems required if this was actually orchestrated.
39.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
Yes, you're right. You can't say your function operates in Z "but has solutions in Q". That's what people are doing when they take a real function and go "ooh look, secret complex solutions!"
40.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
If you say "this function f operates on the integers", you can't turn around and then go "ooh but it has solutions in the rationals!" No it doesn't, it doesn't exist in that space.
41.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
Complex numbers are just a field over 2D vectors, no? When you find "complex solutions to an equation", you're not working with a real equation anymore, you're working in C. I hate when people talk about complex zeroes l
42.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
Great writeup! Looks like this is going to be relevant very soon. > Tools do not make a culture; the people engaging on it do Absolutely, but it's also important to keep in mind that the tool has a big impact on culture by virtue o
43.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
Falling sand games bring back a lot of nostalgia. If you're interested, you should check out dan-ball's version which is one of the progenitors of the genre. Over the years he's added a ton of features, elements, and interact
44.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
> People need to let go of this strange and erroneous idea that humans somehow have this privileged access to the 'real world'. This is irrelevant, the point is that you do have access to a world which LLMs don't, at all
45.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
You can't ask ChatGPT a question like that, because it cannot introspect. What it says has absolutely no bearing on how it may actually respond, it just tells you what it "should" say. You have to actually try to ask it those
46.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
Finally I understand the use case for Genie 3. All the talk about "you can make any videogame or movie" seems to have been pure distraction from real uses like this: limited, time-boxed simulated footage.
47.
by phailhaus 8mo ago
I didn't even know this is something you had to worry about. This is why I use the cloud, all the unknown unknowns.
48.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
Because blind-deaf people interact with the world directly. LLMs do not, cannot, and have never seen the actual world. A better analogy would be a blind-deaf person born in Plato's Cave, reading text all day. They have no idea why thes
49.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
There is zero modeling of the world going on inside, for the very simple reason that it has never seen the world. It's only been given text, which means it has no idea why that text was written. This is the fundamental limitation of
50.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
Until we have world models, that is exactly what they are. They literally only understand text, and what text is likely given previous text. They are very good at this, because we've given it a metric ton of training data. Everything i
51.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
And then the rivulets disappear or change completely because you looked away. The reason this is a dead end is because computationally, there is absolutely no way for the model to keep track of everything that it decided. Everything is kept
52.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
We're talking about context here though. The first couple seconds of Genie are great, but over time it degrades. It will always degrade, because it's hallucinating a world and needs to keep track of too many things.
53.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
> Problem is, that's not what we've observed to happen as these models get better Eh? Context rot is extremely well known. The longer you let the context grow, the worse LLMs perform. Many coding agents will pre-emptively compa
54.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
Nobody tries to jail Microsoft Word, they jail the person using it.
55.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
Because games already exist, and it would be easier for LLMs to write games rather than hallucinate videos.
56.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
But it's not simulating, is it? It's hallucinating videos with an input channel to guide what the video looks like. Why do that instead of just picking Unreal, Unity, etc and having it actually simulated for a fraction of the ef
57.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
They don't though, they're hallucinated videos. They're feeding models tons and tons of 2D videos and hoping they figure out physics from them, instead of just using a game engine and having the LLM write something up that wo
58.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
That makes even less sense, because an AI agent cannot learn effectively from a hallucinated world without internal consistency guarantees. It's an even stronger case for leveraging standard game engines instead.
59.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
I have no idea why Google is wasting their time with this. Trying to hallucinate an entire world is a dead-end. There will never be enough predictability in the output for it to be cohesive in any meaningful way, by design. Why are they not
60.
by phailhaus 9mo ago
Most people don't like putting on VR headsets, no matter what the content is. It just never broke out of the tech enthusiast niche.

More ›