skeledrew

5 ms·

61.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
There are those who are only interested in seeing what's on top of mountain, without having to climb it. Let them go see as they wish. Those who want to climb should still do their thing, without taking issue with the option of being d
62.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Maybe there is no next layer. This is it, and it'll just be iterated on for decades.
63.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
> Something like "sans AI" Sounds like something that'll shrink to an insignificant niche over time, rendering it meaningless as a category.
64.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
You can flag posts though. Enough flags kills.
65.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Nobody's stopping you from writing code, whether as a hobby or you find/start a company where that's valued.
66.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
No expiration date means treat as already expired.
67.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
There's no way to reliably filter that "vibecoded slop" or "low value LLM-written article" (BTW what about low value human-written articles?) without users actually interacting with them. And it's actually the
68.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
> you're new here Their account is 2 years older than yours. Doesn't say much since you could've been using another or sans account long before then, but still.
69.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
> because it's become foundational infrastructure Which will happen in due time, like electricity and the general computer.
70.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
> big AI labs have bots commenting and voting I'd love to see some proof of this.
71.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
People post and interact with what interests - or triggers - them. Yesterday it was one thing, today it's AI, and tomorrow it'll be another thing. Just have to ack the flow, and find another way to filter for your non-today'
72.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Even with the genome available, a lot of humans will have to be experimented on to ensure the efficacy of the "supervirus". Just as we still need a lot of experimentation to determine the efficacy of new treatments.
73.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
And yet we aren't extinct, whether by someone's design or accident. Heck we don't have significant deaths occurring over time due to biological poisons. Most deaths at still overwhelmingly via conventional weapons.
74.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Think of it this way: if it wasn't generally crazy difficult to create even somewhat effective bioweapons (due to the reasons given in the article), there would've been non-trivial use of said weapons in terrorism, war, assassinat
75.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Luckily banning open source models isn't actually practical, unless all ISPs are tasked with monitoring for huge downloads, and even then Bittorrent or similar can render such monitors useless.
76.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
By definition mutation is a random phenomenon, so there's no telling what could happen. But the most likely outcome is the virus loses all efficacy, just as we have a lot of mutations happening within us but they usually amount to noth
77.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
A surge in rape cases and just curiosity into this new heightened-sex fad will lead to discovery pretty quickly.
78.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Some of it was illegal. Most of it was permissible or grey zoned. There was no whistleblower program he could've used that would've led to anything more than sources getting shut down and the matter getting swept under a carpet. N
79.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
There doesn't have to be an infinite supply, just a significantly greater portion, which there is.
80.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
We have a pretty famous example, someone who's actions actually led to change: Edward Snowden. He didn't quit prematurely, crying to whoever would listen that he thought the US had a massive ongoing surveillance program. He actu
81.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
By the time authorities get there, if they actually prioritize it (police in many places already have a track record for not being very responsive, unless there're actual signs of a crime), something may have already happened to the ch
82.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Intuition is just detecting and following patterns, which AI is already very good at.
83.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Can't exactly show since those things have already been discovered of course. But there is already a good list of AI discoveries out there in various fields, and it's still early days. Humans also build on what comes before. Many
84.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
> the fact that it's an immoral thing to do This is carrying a lot of weight. What makes working on frontier models "immoral"? Because there is potential for misuse? Would you also say working at a knife factory is immoral
85.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Today we see the Nazis as bad. Do you think they saw themselves as such? They had an ideal, and they worked towards it. And I'd say they're were many who didn't care about that ideal and just wanted a job. You can't comp
86.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Sure studies can be designed to get a desired result, but we're talking about this particular study. Do you see any issues in how it was done that would point to designed-for-desired-result?
87.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
> AI cannot create Say what now? - https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/ai-is-inventing-molecules-... - https://www.forbes.com/sites/anishasircar/2026/04/17/ai-solv... - https
88.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
What does that have to do with the results I'd the study? Do you think there will be a different result if it was done by anyone else, anywhere else?
89.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
Funny. It's the same result as that famous painting labeled as AI-generated and people found many faults with it. It's just showing that people are biased against AI itself; the quality of the content doesn't really matter.
90.
by skeledrew 1mo ago
No, others don't have to leave. Will Jacob's leaving cause a perspective shift in anyone remaining there? Seriously doubt it. I don't see what a new person ramping up has to do with this. And I don't really see any posit

More ›