slopinthebag

3 ms·

1.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
eh, momentum has a pretty rigorous definition and it's possible to define it qualitatively. perhaps a better example would have been hardness, where A is harder than B when it scratches B in a test. but it's borderline, and quite
2.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
yes but there is a big difference between 100 sloppy features vs a handful of strongly and safely executed ones. it's not linear in effort.
3.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
probably also preferable to buying votes by making and executing promises to give people free stuff/programs. at least they aren't using tax payer money
4.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
my point is that there isnt much difference, and #2 happens by every politician in every democracy. i have no desire to defend musk but imo people should be criticized for valid reasons or you risk diluting the other arguments.
5.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
yes in the same sense that the organisation of football players forms the concept of a team which has properties distinct from each individual player
6.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
i'd be on board with this concept but the author seems to believe his point is generalisable to all under industries, hence committing the same fallacy you're talking about at a large scale. but you're still right. i disregar
7.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
right because true democracy is when you give cheques to people to convince other people to vote a certain way
8.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
curl is certainly a much more difficult problem to solve well, and does so without 30 million issues or whatever the CC codebase has
9.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
your thermostat isn't intelligent. however we pretty much use intelligence as a proxy for consciousness since we cannot actually tell how much of a subjective experience any thing has. so we use intelligence as the metric instead. ty
10.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
i used "potential" when i should have used "possible" if aliens landed on earth and seemed a lot like us, we would have to grapple with the possibility that they might be conscious and deserving of the same moral conside
11.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
if there is a potential for them to be intelligent and conscious, it's probably wrong to use them until we know for sure.
12.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
it doesn't matter? if they're actually intelligent or conscious what we are doing is essentially slavery. it matters an enormous deal ethically and/or morally.
13.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
> There is a good definition of intelligence. It's what intelligence tests measure. what do intelligence tests measure?
14.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
would this imply llms aren't intelligent because they have no academic or professional pedigree or credentials? :P
15.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
this assumes the point of oss is purely utilitarian, which is not true for many people
16.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
because you can do this with_allocator(&arena, || { third_party_library::do_work() }); there is nothing stopping you from using custom allocators with your own code or with calls to thirdparty dependencies but custom al
17.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
they aren't gonna send a threatening email, they just ghostban you.
18.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
i find it fascinating how big of a rust hater you are. willing to outright lie to make your point
19.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
why would you think they would make that publicly visible?
20.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
uh yeah...we need hardware attestation and a protocol to make it work cross platform like, yesterday... holy shit
21.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
just chiming in to say that i agree with you. i initially felt demotivated and passionless but the more i use llms to generate code the more i feel like knowledge of the concepts are crucial to generating useful code. eg. you dont need to m
22.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
yes people don't understand that there is often a runtime performance cost to explictness as well
23.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
i think the reason is more that arena's let you manage lifetimes in groups instead of pointer chasing. if you have to manually manage memory, it's eaiser to manage a small number of arena objects instead of a large number of indiv
24.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
i dunno, people are using rust effectively to build applications too. and apple has started using swift in the kernal. i do agree that applications are probably best built in fast garbage collected language. but it also seems like go, java,
25.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
ironically rust has fewer features than c++ and zig has more than c
26.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
yes i've noticed this as well. they all stem from a heterodoxical corner of the programming community who are obsessed about performance. this isn't a bad thing, considering how slow modern software is! but this group believes per
27.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
yeah to me zig exists as a counter-reaction to rust. which means avoiding both the good and bad things rust does. and rust does a lot of things right, so...
28.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
thats no different from not understanding why a sufficiently complex and obfuscated binary of a program "makes decisions"
29.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
yea, plus they have been rlhf'ed to an inch of their lives as well. hard to tell if frontier models can solve more problems because of that or not.
30.
by slopinthebag 2mo ago
send me some cheese pls :) also 6% is something ive never seen. does it come in an extra large bag?

More ›