skeledrew

72 ms·

1681.
by skeledrew 3y ago
I see this, and I like how it sounds on the surface. But I can't help but raise an eyebrow when I see "carbon neutral". Got me wondering how they'll be delivering the gas, if they won't be using trucks or building o
1682.
by skeledrew 3y ago
OK. I enjoyed the mental exercise though, thanks for that. Also, as someone who's formally studied philosophy, I'd say there is definitely value in thought experiments, particularly as I think we got to an objective level in this
1683.
by skeledrew 3y ago
We will consider intervening in nature to be a "worthwhile effort" right up to the moment we finally make the planet 100% uninhabitable.
1684.
by skeledrew 3y ago
Unnaturally created and maintained.
1685.
by skeledrew 3y ago
We don't know that for sure though. All it takes is a single seed in an ideal condition. And that condition could've probably happened in a way that the pear wouldn't have the advantage that's caused some to name it &quo
1686.
by skeledrew 3y ago
And look at the state of the world with all our interventions. We may be "a part of nature", but the things we do to it are definitely not natural. We're the only ones doing collectively irreparable harm, so as not to be at i
1687.
by skeledrew 3y ago
Ah, typical. Nature taking its course and, once again, humans decide they know what's better and is going in to "correct" things. Then a few years in there's the cry about the disruption that was caused, and yet even mor
1688.
by skeledrew 3y ago
An interesting thought experiment, but there's a flaw in it, an implicit fallacy that's probably a straw man. On its own, the argument would likely stand that Mary gains new knowledge on actually being exposed to color. However, t
1689.
by skeledrew 3y ago
This may come off as pedantic, but "identical" is a very strong term when it comes to something like chemistry. The smallest chemical difference can manifest as a large physical difference. Consider that genetically, humans are ab
1690.
by skeledrew 3y ago
I'd say that, when it comes to chemistry, only 100% reproduction can be considered identical. Anything less is to be deemed similar to some degree. And so without the correct amount of salt and/or spices, we're talking about
1691.
by skeledrew 3y ago
If the food is chemically identical then the taste would be the same though, since taste (and smell) is about chemistry. I do get what you're saying though.
1692.
by skeledrew 3y ago
I'd content that those are skills (gained through experience) rather than knowledge (gained through rote learning).
1693.
by skeledrew 3y ago
I was reading it OK, but my browser performance kept deteriorating as I scrolled, until it crashed. Then I opened in another browser with NoScript and all was well.
1694.
by skeledrew 3y ago
The former doesn't boil down to that at all. Read the entire section without picking out bits. Providing the functionality of the Program as a service is NOT the same as providing a service that uses the Program's functionality. S
1695.
by skeledrew 3y ago
The kid's customers have no reason to be unhappy. They come, pay for their lemonade and go. No problem if that other one goes off and makes their own; at least it's a more fair affair and they can honestly compete on actual merits
1696.
by skeledrew 3y ago
You can use it in your own service without triggering the clause, as long as that service isn't about providing the product itself to 3rd party users.
1697.
by skeledrew 3y ago
AGPL wouldn't help in this situation either, as it focuses on the sharing of modifications of the original. Imagine your child makes lemonade to sell and a friend drops by, they say it's OK for the friend to have some, and then sa
1698.
by skeledrew 3y ago
I get the malware-infection potential, but it's still blows my mind that the fake package wasn't caught earlier by the actual users. All those downloads and nobody wondered why X feature that depends on it wasn't working? Wha
1699.
by skeledrew 3y ago
Why are limitations relevant?
1700.
by skeledrew 3y ago
There seems to be some sort of flaw or misalignment in the hypothesis. By my reading, it seems this trio is saying LLMs do arithmetic by predicting the digits, and at intermediate stages there are actually partial predictions, and so there
1701.
by skeledrew 3y ago
Why is it perfectly reasonable to discriminate against the computer? Would the same apply to someone - with equivalent photographic memory - who listens to a ton of music and is thus inspired?
1702.
by skeledrew 3y ago
I haven't tried Claude, Gemini was pretty bad the first time I tried it, and GPT4 is pretty good... for coding. I never thought to use any of them as a "conversational agent" before as they weren't advertised as such. No
1703.
by skeledrew 3y ago
I just had a surprisingly coherent conversation with it mainly about Apple and the DMA. For over an hour. The cracks started to show eventually when it rehashed previous points/questions, but a simple "we discussed this" fixe
1704.
by skeledrew 3y ago
Quite a bit of interesting history here. This resonates with my thoughts on the matter. On the AI/automation point, my largest curiosity is what will happen when we get to 99+% of the automation of all value-providing labor. At that po
1705.
by skeledrew 3y ago
This actually makes sense, no /s. After all, the core reason for a business to hire is to access talent to fulfill various business requirements. And the better a given employee does, particularly one doing software development things,