qarl

5 ms·

1.
by qarl 5d ago
You make a compelling argument. :)
2.
by qarl 5d ago
> (which are complex) EDIT: Why am I being downvoted? I already stated in my original comment that my taxes are not simple, they are complex. Is he accusing me of lying? Why would I lie there if I could just make the whole thing up?
3.
by qarl 5d ago
Soley? Factoring? Again, that is not what is being described here: "knowing it was AI irrespective of anything else." > And no - I don't think it's fair to call the art bad when in fact what you mean is you don'
4.
by qarl 5d ago
Each year I have Claude do my taxes (which are complex) and compare them to those of our tax consultant. Each year it's exactly the same. I guess I'm getting really lucky?
5.
by qarl 5d ago
Yes, I know. But you're using it as I described.
6.
by qarl 6d ago
I'm quite happy with the process I've stumbled into: 1) Plan the hell out of everything. Aggressively have multiple agents weigh-in on that plan, in sequential waves. Don't skimp here. 2) Have subagents review every code co
7.
by qarl 6d ago
Ok... ? It does seem biased (judging the art without even looking at it) and it does seem negative (it's shit) so I don't understand where I'm missing the boat? Can you elaborate?
8.
by qarl 6d ago
All I'm saying is that it's prejudice. And it is.
9.
by qarl 6d ago
HEH. Well... so long as you agree it's prejudice... that's a good start.
10.
by qarl 7d ago
That's not what I said. I said the first one I saw was not AI art via simple inspection. I wondered if you even looked. Did you even look?
11.
by qarl 7d ago
HEH. Well... the only other option is supernatural. Is that what you mean?
12.
by qarl 7d ago
Factor? That's not what was described: "knowing it was AI irrespective of anything else." And no - I don't think it's fair to call the art bad when in fact what you mean is you don't like the way it was made.
13.
by qarl 7d ago
Unfair in this context is judging the art without even looking at it.
14.
by qarl 7d ago
Why you making me check for you? The first one I clicked on is at a stock photo site that says: Every visual at iStock is crafted through human expertise, creativity, and ingenuity. We do not allow AI-generated visuals in our library.
15.
by qarl 7d ago
Yes. I remember the "passenger" episode of Westworld. And that is EXACTLY what LLMs do. They will entirely confabulate a reason for something they have no idea about, if they think they should know about it. They do an incredi
16.
by qarl 7d ago
> knowing it was AI irrespective of anything else was enough to think it was bad. That's prejudice.
17.
by qarl 7d ago
You should try typing "American flag clipart" into Google and see non-AI images with the wrong number of stars.
18.
by qarl 7d ago
HEH. It seems like you don't remember the early days of Photoshop.
19.
by qarl 7d ago
> The axioms of Fibonacci... Hmmm. I'm afraid we're just going to have to agree to disagree. You have a nice day.
20.
by qarl 7d ago
> You said neither by the way, you said "evaluate". You are entirely correct. I was sloppy in my first comment. I should have said simulate. My sincere apologies if that's been the crux of our dispute. > The only POS
21.
by qarl 7d ago
You mean hallucinations? Hallucinations don't really work that way. They happen when you ask an LLM to generate new material. Not so much reviewing existing material. But there's always the "ask a second LLM to get two opin
22.
by qarl 7d ago
> don't use LLMs Don't you think they're useful as fact checkers?
23.
by qarl 7d ago
> For everyday-life purposes, we can’t get around the fact that quantum mechanics makes it impossible to predict the future robustly. You've moved the goalposts again. I said simulate, not predict. It is possible to simulate the e
24.
by qarl 7d ago
It sounds like you're redefining wealth as evolutionary advantage. That's fine - but it's not what most people mean by the word.
25.
by qarl 7d ago
Yes, most social contracts do stem from evolved strategies. That was my original point. But parenting in humans varies from culture to culture. That's what makes it a social construct.
26.
by qarl 7d ago
My point was - mathematicians still argue about whether the axiom of choice is a good idea or not. They probably always will. So mathematical axioms are in flux.
27.
by qarl 7d ago
Friend, I'm not going to chase your ever changing text. Please just use the reply button.
28.
by qarl 7d ago
Re: Collatz - you've moved the goalposts. Answering Collatz requires solving a halting problem. I didn't claim that I could find the end of an infinite computation. I claimed to be able to simulate a finite one. And - you shoul
29.
by qarl 8d ago
> There are models, but the fact of those models is that they do not apply to "any degree of accuracy", as you claim. Are you sure? https://preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/09/23/the-laws-u
30.
by qarl 8d ago
> given that we don't yet have a mathematical model of all of physics as we know it Yes... but that's in the area of the big bang and black holes. My understanding is that the chemistry of the brain is very well modeled. So, u

More ›