xpe

76 ms·

691.
by xpe 1y ago
Radiolab's overdramatic style has the ability to ruin even my favorite topics.
692.
by xpe 1y ago
Varying the stakes would be interesting. My understanding is this: in these computerized multi-player repeated games, each agent has no knowledge of previous games nor identities of other players. So every game a particular agent plays must
693.
by xpe 1y ago
Somehow I got on Hillsdale’s mailing list in college. In the spirit of open-mindedness, I try to read their newsletter from time to time without vomiting. I found it nearly impossible. There are much better places to find intellectually hon
694.
by xpe 1y ago
Maybe the author was -- or maybe not -- but for a large number of people there is an implication that one could "blame" corporations for being selfish, self-serving, criminal, clueless, self-destructive, leading to social ills, an
695.
by xpe 1y ago
> You talk as though a company exists in its own right independent of the humans. I didn’t say that, nor do I mean that. My point is this: don’t be surprised when people or organizations act rationally according to the situations they fi
696.
by xpe 1y ago
I didn't say that, and I think you know I didn't say that. Want to engage on this in way that is more than trading one-liners? On a human level, people are held to a set of laws and exist in a world of social norms. "Followin
697.
by xpe 1y ago
Blame the system, not the actors. See a recent HN submission, The Evolution of Trust by Nicky Case: https://ncase.me/trust/ If there's one big takeaway from all of game theory, it's this: What
698.
by xpe 1y ago
If you want the take-aways, click the next-to-last navigation circle on the bottom of the screen. I won't paste the spoilers here, because I think it would detract the experience.
699.
by xpe 1y ago
* tool -> toll
700.
by xpe 1y ago
Glad you are open to feedback. My top question is: What kind of people do you want to read this and why?
701.
by xpe 1y ago
The title is vague in my opinion. What kind of API? What problem does it hope to solve? The article uses querying system data as examples, but after skimming it, I’m not sure why I would care. My comment is also a criticism of the article,
702.
by xpe 1y ago
One way to think about meaning is a general pattern to which behavior matches. This would be similar to a teleological cause in Aristotle’s framing. Another way to think about meaning is how a person frames the importance of their decisions
703.
by xpe 1y ago
On comparable benchmarks with comparable guarantees? Comparable persistence levels? I’m very skeptical.
704.
by xpe 1y ago
No issues on macOS for me on my MBP 16”. Probably the default resolution setting I think. What platform + resolution for you?
705.
by xpe 1y ago
Zed and Cursor are very different; I wouldn’t put them in the same bucket myself. I’ve been using the Zed AI assistant panel for a while (manual control over the context window by including files and diagnostics) — will try the new agentic
706.
by xpe 1y ago
The first time I used Zed, I really noticed and appreciated the very low latency between a keypress and visual result. It created a great sense of “connection” to the experience. (I’ve previously used VS Code, Emacs, Sublime Text, JetBrains
707.
by xpe 1y ago
> In attempting to explain why my point of view has been misunderstood by you I also attempted to find a reason for it. What have I misunderstood? Help me understand. What is the key point you want to make that you think I misunderstand?
708.
by xpe 1y ago
> Why do you strain so hard to lionize this behavior? > lionize: give a lot of public attention and approval to (someone); treat as a celebrity: modern athletes are lionized. Where in my comment do I lionize Musk? Please calm down. Pl
709.
by xpe 1y ago
If you are a materialist, the laws of physics are the problem. But to speak plainly, Musk is a complex figure, frequently problematic, and he often exacts a tool on the people around him. Part of this is attributable to his wealth, part to
710.
by xpe 1y ago
"democratize" has been often abused: https://intage.us/articles/words/democratize/
711.
by xpe 1y ago
There is the game of Nomic where a turn involves proposing a rule change.
712.
by xpe 1y ago
I’m glad it helped. AI is often polarizing and brings out heated opinions.
713.
by xpe 1y ago
> because the entire discussion around the use of LLMs for content generation instead of, you know, being able to personally describe your professional experience... I don't think I'm following. Why do you think it is "ins
714.
by xpe 1y ago
MCP isn't a replacement for AI intelligence; it is a complement: a pragmatic way to make AI web actions more reliable, efficient, and scalable. Don't assume a zero-sum game between AI intelligence and integration work. > We are
715.
by xpe 1y ago
They edited their post to remove the most offensive part, which I appreciate: they changed "BS skills" to "skills". (This leads to an unfortunate situation where my comment looks out of place -- a design error, in my opi
716.
by xpe 1y ago
Let's step back. The changes relating to AI can be unsettling. But please stop taking it out on other people.
717.
by xpe 1y ago
> the information density of the resume.pdf is superior to the ... llms.txt Yes, the visual density is higher on a carefully constructed PDF (measured by characters per square centimeter for example)
718.
by xpe 1y ago
There is no need to be rude.
719.
by xpe 1y ago
> MCP seems like we have given up on making the models good or smart. First, whatever you mean by "we", we can do more than one thing at a time. Second, there are advantages to designing a protocol with formal semantics.
720.
by xpe 1y ago
How would you test this claim relative to alternative hypotheses such as: 1. Investors choosing poorly 2. Investors not managing relationships well after they invest. Maybe we can open up the discussion to involve the other design decisions

More ›