timr

6 ms·

61.
by timr 2mo ago
I mean, sure. If people tell me that they're avoiding Grok because of that bug, I sorta get it. I think it's silly (again: they're all hoovering up my data), but at least it's a rational basis related to the actual pro
62.
by timr 2mo ago
> I noticed you glossed over Elon getting caught biasing his AI service to say he's the best blowjob-giver, the main reason I would never use Grok. I "glossed over" all of your political comments.
63.
by timr 2mo ago
"Bizarre" only in the sense that you're purposely trying not to understand. Literally every commodity product is in a crowded space, and easily substituted. If it's a good product (Grok Build objectively is one of the ve
64.
by timr 2mo ago
> yet we're talking about alternative services that are all very similar. Yes, that's what "commodity" means, and why I used the word. > There are other reasons to not use Elon Musk's AI beyond politics, thoug
65.
by timr 2mo ago
> so half of the profit made on your dollar spend winds up benefiting him personally No, it doesn't. Aside from the face-slappingly obvious fact that SpaceX is losing a half a billion dollars a quarter, that's not how corporate
66.
by timr 2mo ago
It was a bug, and was immediately corrected. The other harnesses have bugs too. You just don't know about them. Frankly, the people who keep bringing this up are mostly engaged in motivated reasoning. I don't trust any company,
67.
by timr 2mo ago
Yeah, OK. You’re making excuses for letting politics eat your life. Enjoy yourself, I guess. Setting aside the actual legitimacy of whatever complaints you have about Musk, you aren’t “supporting” him by using Grok, any more than you’re “su
68.
by timr 2mo ago
Shrug. All I can say is that my experience was that I was regularly hitting Codex’ limits, and I don’t with Grok. So much of this depends on your style, language and other more subjective factors. Codex has been really doling out the rese
69.
by timr 2mo ago
I am trying all of them. At this time, for me, Grok hits the sweet spot of quality, speed, cost and ease of use. I’m absolutely “hot money” when it comes to coding models. These things are commodities.
70.
by timr 2mo ago
Sure, you can let politics dominate everything you do. Or you can realize that SpaceX is a massive (public) company with thousands of employees, and millions of shareholders, all of whom have their own opinions and goals, just like any othe
71.
by timr 2mo ago
Those are the exceptions, not the rule. But also, you're wrong: most polyps would not become cancerous -- only 5%-10% ever do. As a preventative intervention on otherwise healthy people, colonoscopy is one of the most effective thing
72.
by timr 2mo ago
You’re blaming it on lack preventative care, but the truth is that there is very little preventative care that is shown to be effective at anything more than burning money. The few things that are effective (e.g. vaccines) are largely ine
73.
by timr 2mo ago
Again, the parsimonious conclusion is that you are exaggerating, and wrong.
74.
by timr 2mo ago
I don't know about "shorter", but basically, the cold days are decreasing faster than the hot days are increasing. This is still a problem! But the people who run around screaming about heat waves causing mass casualty today
75.
by timr 2mo ago
Yeah, I know. I didn't expect these to be popular comments. There's a hardcore contingent of people who have an absolutely unshakeable conviction of apocalypse that borders on religious faith, coupled with next to zero understandi
76.
by timr 2mo ago
> Crazy that you think even these graphs, which do not include the last six years, are just fine. Did I say those words? This is the latest assessment report, AR6, published 2021-2023. It's the latest IPCC data available. The next
77.
by timr 2mo ago
Arguing that the IPCC report is "downplaying the impact" because of corruption -- which is what you seem to be doing, without evidence -- is an implausible assertion. The far more likely conclusion is that you're wrong.
78.
by timr 2mo ago
Oops. Links got truncated. Here: Figure 11-9: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/chapter-11/figure... Figure 11-2: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures&#
79.
by timr 2mo ago
> People dying from extreme heatwaves, weather, and famines due to climate change has been predicted for decades at this point; and this is exactly the sort of climatic setup that will enable this to happen. Yeah, people have been "
80.
by timr 2mo ago
Hurricane season in Hawaii is June through November. August and September have always been peak months. It's completely normal to have hurricanes at this time of year. https://www.weather.gov/hfo/faq https:/
81.
by timr 2mo ago
> I don't engage with people who aren't willing to be honest with what the data supports. OK, whatever. But what was I dishonest about? Cite the figures. Should be pretty easy. ...oh, and by the way: > You acknowledge that t
82.
by timr 2mo ago
You need to bring evidence, not press releases. Your first link says that more people died this year , relative to predictions for this year , because of a single heat wave. This has ~nothing to do with the discussion at hand, and is a cl
83.
by timr 2mo ago
> Your linked figure confirms that 2018 was cooler than things are today. So? what does that have to do with the question at hand? An 8 year change is irrelevant in the world of climate science. It's statistical noise in a system
84.
by timr 2mo ago
> Uhhh right... but all the other hard parts are being solved too, correct? LLMs are clearly going to solve a part that, 10 years ago, one would've assumed would be one of the highest and last barriers to go down. No. No, the barrie
85.
by timr 2mo ago
I generally agree -- the actual risk is from serious/state actors, and for those, the barriers are not high. I'm just saying that people are focused on the wrong problem because they've got LLM-brain.
86.
by timr 2mo ago
No. My argument is that many things in the world are hard in a way that computers cannot solve, and the existence of LLMs does not change that. Synthetic biology is one of those things.
87.
by timr 2mo ago
Not even close to the same thing. That's taking an existing viral transfection system and swapping in a single gene. Thermo Fisher sells a kit to do this [1]. It's something you might do a few thousand times on the way to actual
88.
by timr 2mo ago
Yes, that's one of the ones I was talking about. That's not a service that makes you a virus, and making one from an mRNA transcript is not trivial.
89.
by timr 2mo ago
No, the sophomoric LLM argument does not apply here. The world is not a big computer. The point is that the rate-limiting step in producing something infective is a couple million dollars in special lab equipment, skilled practitioners, a
90.
by timr 2mo ago
No, you literally cannot. Synthesizing a stretch of DNA is trivial, and what you can send away for [1]. Building a functional virus is not even remotely a turn-key operation. Assuming you could get the genome, expressing that genome in

More ›