vidarh

32 ms·

511.
by vidarh 6mo ago
> (there is no singular thread behind my comment. I think we probably have more in agreement than not, and its more a question of finding the precise words to declare the shapes we perceive.) I moved this up top, because I agree, despite
512.
by vidarh 6mo ago
When people do that they are using skills wrong. The best way to use a skill is as a means to give targeted instructions on how to make use of cli / tools/ libraries, with the skill just covering the "squishy bits" that
513.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Initial drop, as people learn to use the tools, and while they keep babysitting their harnesses. Then significant boost once people start getting used to running the agents in the background, especially once they start running multiple sess
514.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Liability, penalties, trust, and responsibility are means we use to try to influence the application of the processes that do. They do not directly affect reliability. They can be applied just as much to a team using AI as one that does not
515.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Because certain aspects (both are error prone) are similar and comparable. The notion that two entities need to be close in abilities for it to be possible to compare them is nonsense. You make the point for me: We managed to put men on the
516.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Sure, when that is possible. However, there are lots of processes we don't know how to automate in a deterministic way. Hence the vast amount of investment in building organisations of people with mechanism to make peoples output more
517.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Depends on the clients maturity, but some places all of the above.
518.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Not the same person, but it really depends on projects. E.g. I have some projects that involve working to large specification sets where we can measure rate of delivery against the spec. If your spec is fuzzy and incomplete, then it gets ha
519.
by vidarh 6mo ago
I work on projects where we measure the output. There's nothing "pseudo" about it.
520.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Humans also drop any hard requirements you specify regularly, and similarly require review. Nevertheless we manage to increase reliability of human output through processes and reviews, and most of the methods we use for harnesses are taken
521.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Yeah, unless it's just me, and on a whim, which doesn't happen often, I'd always reserve online.
522.
by vidarh 6mo ago
If you're going to rent a few ec2 gpu instances you might as well funnel things through openrouter. Not that many of us have workflows where trusting an LLM provider is a problem but sending the data to EC2 is not. As for why, why woul
523.
by vidarh 6mo ago
There are certainly quirks, but identifying and conforming to those quirks is not that complex. E.g. I had Kimi "fix" my harness to work better with Kimi by pointing it at the (open source) kimi-cli + web search and telling it t
524.
by vidarh 6mo ago
At several times the price of DeepSeek, though, so it's a tradeoff... Even then Pro is still cheaper than Haiku.
525.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Yes, it is rather overt sarcasm.
526.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Well, I am not certain whether it is the case. There is no need to be certain about that to treat other people the same way, because whether or not I believe they have a subjective experience has zero impact on how they react to stimuli .
527.
by vidarh 6mo ago
I agree that if we were to go around and openly treat others as effectively NPC's then, yes, people would react very negatively. But that is very different from understanding that we can't prove that others are not. We still nee
528.
by vidarh 6mo ago
While I wouldn't do asm, I love the approach and do much the same myself but in Ruby instead. My wm, shell, terminal, editor, file manager, pop-up menu (dmenu-like) are all pure ruby (including font rendering and X11 bindings). These a
529.
by vidarh 6mo ago
We can't even tell about the feedback loop. LLMs shows why: we have no way of telling if our active memory is true or if the present moment I'd the only thing that have ever existed for us.
530.
by vidarh 6mo ago
A large part of the problem is what you consider consciousness. If you talk about having a subjective experience, then we don't know of any way to prove that even other humans than ourselves have one. We go entirely by assumptions base
531.
by vidarh 6mo ago
How do you imagine a brain can distinguish data from a real sense and data from another source?
532.
by vidarh 6mo ago
I do not know, because we have no known way of measuring consciousness. I merely object to the notion that we know how to tell who or what has a consciousness.
533.
by vidarh 6mo ago
How do you measure this consciousness?
534.
by vidarh 6mo ago
It was an ad hominem, and so is this. I do not pretend. I asked honest questions that clearly neither you nor the previous person are able to answer.
535.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Indeed. We assume a lot, because we don't know. We don't have have settled, universal definitions of what consciousness means. But that also means that while we like to rule out consciousness in other things, we don't have
536.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Ad hominems are always a nice way of getting out of answering something you have no answer to.
537.
by vidarh 6mo ago
We do not know what the "low level requirements for consciousness" are. We do not know how to measure whether consciousness is present in an entity - even other humans - or whether it is just mimicry, nor whether there is a distin
538.
by vidarh 6mo ago
How do I know you have this "self"? How do you know other humans do?
539.
by vidarh 6mo ago
Sensory input is nothing but data.
540.
by vidarh 6mo ago
We could have a Chernobyl every year, and the environmental impact would still be a rounding error compared to hydro, if we're going to go to environmental impacts rather than lives. That is the weakest aspect of hydro - it causes ma

More ›