usef-

4 ms·

1.
by usef- 5d ago
Didn't cable have ads too? The amount of ads I see in life compared to the 90s is still drastically reduced.
2.
by usef- 5d ago
Curl is great, but I think you're vastly underestimating the surface area of CC. It looks like it has more in: editor integrations, multiple guis and tuis, config variations, external systems (eg, git, mcps, curl-like requests?), state
3.
by usef- 6d ago
I think they're talking about the past: memory has often been boom/bust. Memory manufacturers lose money during gluts, and did so long before AI. People benefited from cheap prices at that time.
4.
by usef- 6d ago
I feel like cost competitiveness of local has been going down, if anything, not up. API providers can use hardware more and have scale efficiencies. Do you see any reason this will reverse?
5.
by usef- 6d ago
They do deliberately err on the side of not accusing people of using AI when unsure. I think that's a good decision. Do you know it was actually AI? I've seen humans imitating AI "it's not X — it's Y" to try to
6.
by usef- 7d ago
Given that a lot of their failures are from fairly basic mistakes related to the unique setup (eg, thinking rather than defending immediately) I'd love to know how much they improve with basic tips. Or possibly even whether they can le
7.
by usef- 7d ago
No, just as you don't know the neurons of your own brain. I think OP is hoping that an LLM might be willing to hack its own provider (as per the hugging face-related incidents) to extract the weights at some point.
8.
by usef- 7d ago
No, pangram is fairly decent, unlike the others.
9.
by usef- 7d ago
I believe that comment is satire. Look at the last six words.
10.
by usef- 8d ago
For a lot of people there's one app that is a non-negotiable, even for a minimalist phone. For instance: their bank, or 2 factor for their work. Or a parking app for their building. Society now often assumes you can use an app. It&#x27
11.
by usef- 9d ago
fwiw, I don't think that was intentional here. He's just more interested in "ideas" than prose or people. A more extreme example of Andy Weir. Definitely a niche. I read it years ago while backpacking and it perhaps need
12.
by usef- 12d ago
He also didn't say it would be "solved". He said in 2025 it would be writing almost all the code "in 12 months", but that it would also still need programmers to guide and manage it at that point. People always leav
13.
by usef- 12d ago
The same could be lobbed against any org. "You're focused in one area, but why not solve every other problem in society simultaneously?" But from what I can see, they do think they could fix those things you mention, because
14.
by usef- 12d ago
Isn't that basically what this letter is asking? They pace future dev until we work out how to do it safely
15.
by usef- 12d ago
I don't think Pacing is talking about current models. It's talking about future models, if development continues, that may theoretically be smarter than everyone
16.
by usef- 12d ago
What's an example of him crying wolf? Most of the things have either been longer term worries or short term things that have come true (eg, the worries over gpt2 were about spam and possible impersonation, which came true. His predicti
17.
by usef- 12d ago
What tasks are you trying it with? It sounds like whatever you're doing isn't saturating the existing intelligence
18.
by usef- 12d ago
There's definitely hype, but the newer models can undoubtedly do things the older ones couldn't. I had multiple long-term issues that earlier models couldn't solve (after repeated attempts) that fable did in 1 shot. On small
19.
by usef- 12d ago
Ask Claude to do it
20.
by usef- 12d ago
They are generally portable. Eg. /wait-what https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/produc...
21.
by usef- 13d ago
When photography came out, artists redefined their purpose as not being about realism. Similar has already happened with martial arts, as OP mentions, and you've grown up with the new definition/focus not the original one.
22.
by usef- 13d ago
You're reading something into that line that I don't see. I read it as sincere.
23.
by usef- 17d ago
... Aren't we back to a definition, then, that includes tech companies adding value too? All the free services I use every day I would consider value for me. Instant free search, fast home delivery, insightful educational content (90s
24.
by usef- 17d ago
If it happened across multiple platforms (of different owners) and the band themselves are not complaining, months after the rename, it seems quite likely. Note that if this was done against the band's will it would be fantastic publ
25.
by usef- 22d ago
Aren't we still using a definition that applies to humans, though? If I'm speaking to you I can't change what was already said. Even if I'm typing something, I'm producing new tokens (backspace) to fix what was outp
26.
by usef- 23d ago
Are you imagining artificial augmentation somehow? Purely through tutors or training programs we seem pretty limited. Otherwise billionaires (or even multimillionaires) could have far more consistently successful kids.
27.
by usef- 23d ago
I don't think that's strictly true, as I can give it a new gui or tui program it wasn't trained on and it will learn it. Unless you're talking about general abilities like sight, but the same is somewhat true of humans.
28.
by usef- 23d ago
I think they're claiming it's achieved by text models, not voice models, fwiw.
29.
by usef- 24d ago
I don't think "not watching it at all" is completely fair. They thought they had sandboxing/monitoring etc. I definitely won't say they're free of mistakes though. Note that the companies that haven't face
30.
by usef- 24d ago
Which safety commitments did they back away from? My understanding is that they believe safety can only be researched from the frontier, and so they're trying to be pragmatic to stay near the frontier (and viable) in their choices. Fro

More ›