sarchertech

4 ms·

1.
by sarchertech 5d ago
There was much more than just the high profile egregious cases though. Most food adulteration is a quality issue more than a safety problem. Buy old peas but put a little green coloring in is almost the exact same thinking as let’s replace
2.
by sarchertech 5d ago
2 things. 1. If you turn the temperature down too far, the output is just bad and no amount of running prompts optimization will let you hill climb your way to good performance. 2. It’s not about determinism vs non-determinism. It’s about c
3.
by sarchertech 5d ago
I don’t know if that’s true. Look at the amount of lethal product defects over the last 100 years. And before the FDA existed, companies were perfectly willing to put formaldehyde in milk, mercury in candy, and arsenic in vegetables.
4.
by sarchertech 6d ago
If turn the temperature down for tests, they won’t match production behaviors. If you turn it down too far in production, the output will just be bad.
5.
by sarchertech 6d ago
Yeah but in my experience AI boosts output of those humans 10x and only boosts output of programmers who do write maintainable code 50-100%.
6.
by sarchertech 7d ago
This isn’t a web UI, it doesn’t need icons. But more importantly, if you aren’t the kind of person who could make a halfway decent text only poster before, you are going to make the posters at the top of the article. Those are objectively h
7.
by sarchertech 8d ago
That’s an assertion with no evidence that doesn’t match my experience. Agents require far stricter guardrails than humans. Without linters, tests, static analysis, oracles etc… no agent can create a large program. Even if you’re correct, yo
8.
by sarchertech 8d ago
I said “You can’t deterministically keep them from making even a tiny fraction of all the possible errors they can and do make though.” And you replied “This may be platform dependent.” I’m unsure how else to read that other than an implica
9.
by sarchertech 8d ago
> better code than a human would write, Why would that be the case? You can run human written code through the same “linters, compilers, static analysis, fuzzing, testing” as you do agent produced code.
10.
by sarchertech 8d ago
Code analysis can’t detect a sizable fraction of all possible errors because for any Turing complete language the number of possible errors is infinite.
11.
by sarchertech 9d ago
You can’t deterministically keep them from making even a tiny fraction of all the possible errors they can and do make though. You can’t keep humans from making those errors either but you also don’t let an error prone human crank out 20k L
12.
by sarchertech 12d ago
> at least no one would be stupid enough to do the final assembly of anything that might be a weapon from parts the AI designed and arranged to be made. Worrying that an AI is going to figure out how to make a device that looks to everyo
13.
by sarchertech 13d ago
Maybe don’t accuse me of sexism because of a feeling you got based on informal sample you took of writing from some other people on a website. I read the report you linked and it is purely speciation. If you’ve ever read any von misses, thi
14.
by sarchertech 16d ago
By traveling here Aliens have demonstrated the ability to actually manufacture technology more advanced than ours. Even their method of transportation would be an existential threat. Inventing the concept of new weapons isn’t the same as bu
15.
by sarchertech 16d ago
> Ajeya Cotra Please look up her resume. If that’s one of the people who are “much smarter than you”, you’re either very gullible or you don’t give yourself much credit. She has a BS and and has essentially never worked in a technical ro
16.
by sarchertech 19d ago
That’s true. But this idea was unworkable because of basic biology/physics. It doesn’t matter how good the sensor is if you’re dealing with bad samples. For most of the tests they wanted to perform, a finger stick will always provide a
17.
by sarchertech 19d ago
Yeah but the “vision” was just the ideas of a kid with 2 semesters of college classes under her belt saying “what if”. It was never going to work. She had tons of competent engineers working for her. The basic idea was and is unworkable. If
18.
by sarchertech 19d ago
If you think we’re 10-15 years away from self replicating drones, I don’t think there’s anything more I can say to you.
19.
by sarchertech 20d ago
AI research takes physical space and physical prototypes. Even if you can simulate a lot, the simulation is never going to be accurate enough to go from simulation to perfectly working prototype. Especially not with a single rack of GPU ser
20.
by sarchertech 20d ago
Missiles have been doing this for decades. AI drones can’t wipe out humanity without being able to replicate. AI could mostly destroy civilization if you gave it sole launch control of ICBMs. It could also cause a lot of damage to society w
21.
by sarchertech 22d ago
If you can prove that there’s an imminent threat, you can get an injunction.
22.
by sarchertech 22d ago
In practice, writing programs this way tends to result in programs that use less memory not more.
23.
by sarchertech 26d ago
I think I read it as a bit more flippant than you meant it because it was worded assuming the answer was yes.
24.
by sarchertech 27d ago
I mean sure don’t leave a garden hose running overnight. That’s insane. If you leave it running next your house you’ll flood your basement. You said you had a pool though. That and trying to keep 2 non native trees alive in the desert is pr
25.
by sarchertech 27d ago
OP confirmed it was gasoline.
26.
by sarchertech 27d ago
Even if you’re driving a Prius and getting 50mpg, if you’re “driving all the time” you’re spending at least $100 a month in gas. There’s nowhere in the country where a water bill is $1000 a month unless you’re doing a lot of irrigation.
27.
by sarchertech 27d ago
The only way I can read what they wrote to mean that is if they are saying water costs $30-40 a gallon.
28.
by sarchertech 27d ago
If you have little experience writing code, do you know that you actually understand what you’re reading though? For example could you reproduce the code you read immediately after writing it? It’s very easy to “read code” if you’re just re
29.
by sarchertech 27d ago
Have you tried in both directions though? You need to test both sensitivity and specificity.
30.
by sarchertech 27d ago
> I'm already paying 10-times more for water usage than I spend on gas Are you irrigating an enormous yard?

More ›