qarl

11 ms·

271.
by qarl 6mo ago
I don't see your point. The problem is producing the copyrighted work, not processing it beforehand. If it's illegal for AIs it should be illegal for humans, too. Is that really what you're arguing? It should be illegal fo
272.
by qarl 6mo ago
I know people really hate AI training on their work - but is it really any different than a human reading it? I know there's a complaint that AI can verbatim repeat that work. But so can human savants. No one is suing human savants f
273.
by qarl 9mo ago
Yes, I agree, it's entirely possible to find random links interesting. That does not mean they are related to "hacker news". The only reason these stories get upvoted is because of that audience you mentioned.
274.
by qarl 9mo ago
You're a riot. Thank you for assisting me in proving my point.
275.
by qarl 9mo ago
Well, actually, my culture doesn't program me to "bear witness", so no. I mean, you guys don't even try to hide it.
276.
by qarl 9mo ago
Dude - now I have to turn off my auto notify. You are fucking nuts.
277.
by qarl 9mo ago
Why not? They're nice stories. People like stories, even if they're entirely made up. I guess maybe it does feel a bit like gross proselytizing. Hm.
278.
by qarl 9mo ago
Naw. I got him to reveal himself, which was the whole point. It's amazing what you can get people to do.
279.
by qarl 9mo ago
You thought your course mates would be able to write a C compiler that builds the Linux? Huh. Interesting. Like the other guy pointed out, compiler classes often get students to write toy C compilers. I think a lot of students don't
280.
by qarl 9mo ago
Your 2yr old can't build a C compiler in Rust that builds Linux. Sorry mate, I think you're tripping.
281.
by qarl 9mo ago
OK, well, the people in MY software industry use LOC as an informal measure of complexity. LIKE THE WHOLE WORLD DOES. But hey, maybe it's just the extremely high profile projects I've worked on.
282.
by qarl 9mo ago
HA.
283.
by qarl 9mo ago
> the level of performance isn't stated in the linked article so a parser in Python is probably sufficient. No, you'll have to match the performance of the actual code, regardless of what happens to be written in the article.
284.
by qarl 9mo ago
What does this even mean?
285.
by qarl 9mo ago
Deal. I'll pay you IF you can achieve the same level of performance. Heck, I'll double it. You must provide the entire git history with small commits. I won't be holding my breath.
286.
by qarl 9mo ago
Oh yeah, I do. That whole internet thing was a total HOAX. I can't believe people bought into that. Can you imagine if Amazon, EBay, PayPal, or Saleforce existed today?
287.
by qarl 9mo ago
I love how your comment is getting downvoted. Like it's a surprise that startups burn through money. I get the feeling that people really have no idea what they're talking about in here anymore. It's a shame.
288.
by qarl 9mo ago
A compiler that can build linux. That level of quality should be sufficient. Do you know any low quality programmers that write C compilers in rust THAT CAN BUILD LINUX? No you don't. They do not exist.
289.
by qarl 9mo ago
Are you trolling me? Companies (made of humans) write 100,000 LOC all the time. And it's really expensive, despite your suspicions.
290.
by qarl 9mo ago
> It cost $20,000 I'm curious - do you have ANY idea what it costs to have humans write 100,000 lines of code??? You should look it up. :)
291.
by qarl 9mo ago
That distinction doesn't change my point. I am not surprised that a 40 year old project generates better code than this brand new one.
292.
by qarl 9mo ago
> Still a really cool project! Yeah. This test sorta definitely proves that AI is legit. Despite the millions of people still insisting it's a hoax. The fact that the optimizations aren't as good as the 40 year gcc project?
293.
by qarl 9mo ago
Well, if you haven't noticed, LLM topics receive a particularly hostile reaction on HN. My LLM has theorized that its success at answering trivia questions has left some people feeling threatened.
294.
by qarl 9mo ago
I think most Americans agree with you. And that itself will answer where we go from here. Let's see indeed. I'll reach out to you again each year on this date and we'll see how your prediction is holding up.
295.
by qarl 9mo ago
Heh. I'm afraid I don't have time to read all that. Best.
296.
by qarl 9mo ago
He has some interesting beliefs about the basis of human consciousness.
297.
by qarl 9mo ago
> Demanding his art be removed from all art galleries around the world... Well, are you saying people shouldn't complain? Certainly if an overwhelming majority think he was too horrible to display his art, you would agree that it&#x
298.
by qarl 9mo ago
> There will always be ways to escape any negative experimental result. Yeah... except that hasn't been proven. That's just your belief, right? I don't think anyone has proven that string theory can yield no testable pred
299.
by qarl 9mo ago
Well... Penrose got himself into serious trouble speaking on issues beyond his expertise. I respect that he is now being more careful. And it's entirely possible that he isn't up to date on their tech. Why would you doubt his o
300.
by qarl 9mo ago
Heh... as someone on the outside, I feel the need to ask: Has it been rigorously shown that it can never be tested? Or is that your prediction?

More ›