ttoinou

5 ms·

61.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
Difficult truth, but that’s the truth we need to accept
62.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
Anecdotally I hired a junior and it was a net loss
63.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
Lots of software engineers were just stack overflow copy pasters. No offense, it’s also a good way to learn, I’ve also done my fair share of stupid programming, but let’s not pretend the value to humankind was huge there
64.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
Ah yes of course, all companies can afford to hire 5 people for one job to smoothen out the loss of information by employee churn
65.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
I agree with that, and that’s why it’s better to ask an AI and improve your prompt, instead of hiring a human that will disappear and you will loose all institutional knowledge
66.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
Since the luddites at least
67.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
I don’t think humans workers should be cogs in the machine, but from my experience unfortunately that’s how people want to be treated. One simple explanation is that there is no freedom / creativity without responsibility, and the latt
68.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
Well you could make a REAP with better input prompts on longer context then. It’ll improve the REAP quality
69.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
If AI is not beneficial, then those humans could be re-hired soon. Big companies are always doing bad things, but not because they use AI, because they have legal protections which prevents small companies (which could be anyone like you an
70.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
Automating a job is toxic now ?
71.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
Ask a SOTA LLM when Newton was born without any access to internet : the answer is Lossless for our shared culture understanding of this question. Not Near-lossless, lossless. Ask the same LLM when YOU were born, the answer is just wrong fo
72.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
Lossless is objective for information theory. To get from the real world to digital world you need an analog to digital converter, this process is by definition lossy. We are interested in the real world, and information is pure but never r
73.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
Yes, anything not lossless is lossy. Near-lossless is not lossless, so it is lossy. I hope we speak the same language
74.
by ttoinou 3mo ago
There is, after you define what you’re ready to loose and understand the lossy space. That’s how we came up with mobile cellphones, audio and video codecs etc. Literally powering all modern devices we use.
75.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
It's an open secret the european union has nothing to do with the will of the people
76.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
192gb or 256gb of RAM would be enough ! We could run real time large MoE models, REAPed for our usage (e.g. english agentic coding), dynamic quant 2-4bits
77.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
So it’s 10x to 3x cheaper…
78.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
How about brazilian median software developer wage ?
79.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
I was surprised how amazing it is ? What do you wish you had known before getting started? Your yearly financial data is public, everyone will know your income / profit. And you will get spammed, your email will be public too.
80.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
Okay, so the whole world is failing and success doesn't exist. Maybe now you need a better criteria than your previous failure / success_100%_infiniteCost to observe and understand the the world
81.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
200 is much less than the value you’re supposed to get out of it. If it’s not then yeah go ahead and use cheaper models with worst quality
82.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
You are working around the reality : Noam’s name is good on paper, just like a pro footballer player. His name re assures investors, reduces risks. This is good. I don’t care that some are jealous of him because they think they are as good
83.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
No, the way it worked in the past for pro sports wasn’t enough to have those players worldwide famous and gossiped all the time We need to make science more popular We disagree on learning science and engineers, this doesn’t require physica
84.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
How do you know they're following requirements ? At least a quick search about the company providing the service would be useful
85.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
You dont care about which exact provider it is using behind the hood ?
86.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
Its always about how far ahead in the future you plan ahead. And sometimes this future thinking is wasted time
87.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
In which language do you use combinators for that ? Even in that case the refactor can introduce mental overhead when having too many different variable / properties names
88.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
Me too ! I don't follow DRY that much, I'm aware that copy pasting is good enough for a few weeks / months to see how things evolve in the future, and do refactor when it's really needed. That said, how do you know if th
89.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
We still need a way to track that there’s some common pattern in the code. So that when we update one pattern we wonder about the others places in code with the same pattern. Avoiding duplication doesn’t solve that
90.
by ttoinou 4mo ago
Having the whole world connected to top sports players also costs a lot of money, it doesn’t happen naturally To become a good scientist you don’t need much classic capital, you need a good environment. And for ML you only need one computer

More ›