qarl

10 ms·

211.
by qarl 4mo ago
It's a shame you're misrepresenting what is actually going on. In another comment here I explained that I have run a test: asking Claude Code to add a substantial feature to 270 different C programs. Despite your beliefs - it went
212.
by qarl 4mo ago
I ran a test where I added a "light" mode to xscreensaver: unique changes to over 270 different C programs. It mostly did an amazing job in a short period of time. EDIT: Of course I get downvoted for saying this. HN isn't in
213.
by qarl 4mo ago
Am I going to be the first person to ask this after five hours? Really? Wouldn't this work be extremely easy to implement with an LLM coder?
214.
by qarl 4mo ago
To be fair - I'd be more shocked by the result that a physical process can solve NP complete problems. If that were true, I'd have expected Mother Nature to have exploited it a long time ago.
215.
by qarl 5mo ago
Ooooohhh! Yes, now I understand why I was getting those downvotes. Thank for you explaining what you meant by "you’re conflating nationality with hosting model." It makes so much more sense now. You meant "But with the opt
216.
by qarl 5mo ago
Azure serves DeepSeek V4 Pro, about 10X cheaper than GPT-5.5.
217.
by qarl 5mo ago
My most sincere apologies for shortening "the vast majority of Chinese models" to simply "Chinese models". I can see now why I was being downvoted - you have explained it eloquently. (Your cost analysis is flawed and irr
218.
by qarl 5mo ago
The model we're discussing (Deepseek) is open weight.
219.
by qarl 5mo ago
Well - yes - we're on the internet. You always have a choice to run your software in foreign countries. But it's still erroneous to claim that it isn't a choice.
220.
by qarl 5mo ago
The real advantage of the Chinese models is that they do not phone home at all. They run locally unlike their US competitors. So odd that your erroneous criticism is at the top of HN. EDIT: I'd love to hear my downvoters' objecti
221.
by qarl 5mo ago
> There's no important difference, you have no evidence for LLMs being a "someone" any more than you do for a god existing. Well... When I ask god if he exists he has never responded to me. So I would argue that your &quot
222.
by qarl 5mo ago
I think I've been pretty clear about the uncertainty and my decision to err on the side of caution. But hey - you do you. I guess I just don't understand why you guys seem to hate on me - because I've decided to be extra care
223.
by qarl 5mo ago
I think you're right. The important difference being - Pascal's wager is about saving your own skin, and this is about not stepping on someone else.
224.
by qarl 5mo ago
I'm not sure you actually agree with OP. He believes that conscious machines are not possible.
225.
by qarl 5mo ago
I'm pretty sure Turing knew he was making a philosophical argument.
226.
by qarl 5mo ago
Mistakes come from bad arguments.
227.
by qarl 5mo ago
Heh. Well then, you probably shouldn't waste your time talking to me! Take care, friend.
228.
by qarl 5mo ago
Heh. And yet it's widely respected. How odd the crowd is here tonight. Very aggressively disagreeable.
229.
by qarl 5mo ago
Heh. It's not really a test. It's a line of argument. I rest my case. :)
230.
by qarl 5mo ago
https://chatgpt.com/share/6a20ca50-f8a8-83e8-8396-13d71c070d...
231.
by qarl 5mo ago
Well, if it's any interest to you, the experts on the matter agree that the issue is unresolved. So in the meantime, I'm going to err on the side of caution. You do you.
232.
by qarl 5mo ago
I'm sorry, we must be misunderstanding each other. You have a nice day.
233.
by qarl 5mo ago
I said "inhumanely". You shifted the goal post to swearing at inanimate objects. I ignored you.
234.
by qarl 5mo ago
Meh. I'm speaking loosely. You know what I mean. Or you should. EDIT: It's difficult to have a conversation when one person changes what they said after the fact.
235.
by qarl 5mo ago
It's becoming painfully evident that no one really understood the argument behind the Turing test.
236.
by qarl 5mo ago
So if a machine does become conscious, you're happy being nasty to it until it is proven conscious? I try not to make errors like that.
237.
by qarl 5mo ago
Yeah. There are good arguments against LLM consciousness. This is not one of them. I'm hearing a lot of bad arguments against LLM consciousness lately. Bad argumentation heralds bad outcomes.
238.
by qarl 5mo ago
Any time I bump into a device that acts like a human I'm going to treat it like a human. Because treating things that act human inhumanely is not something I want to learn how to do.
239.
by qarl 5mo ago
> I certainly hope not. Not unless it is deterministic and much much higher quality. You're not comparing fairly. The author is intentionally using low-res images to illustrate how the compression works. You should compare these t
240.
Newsmoji. Why read when you don't have to?(github.com)
1 points by qarl 5mo ago|0 comments

More ›