zahlman

6 ms·

61.
by zahlman 1mo ago
I brought this up to someone else and was told that airgapping is apparently much more expensive than I'd naively think. I still think this is a sign that they are not taking their own rhetoric seriously.
62.
by zahlman 1mo ago
> Why have any laws then? If laws can't prevent something, only punish it after the fact (which I agree is true)? Yet we have laws. Because there are many important values of "something" where such punishment acts as a det
63.
by zahlman 1mo ago
> Now to cause hundreds of billions of dollars in losses. I’d say the straightforward way is just do what the ransomware gangs do. Voila. Yeah, not in 6 months, not in 12 months. Never. I think this fails to account properly for how much
64.
by zahlman 1mo ago
From the fact that you are speaking about the site's actions in present tense.
65.
by zahlman 1mo ago
So they're trying to simplify what, the addition of new views to the dashboard?
66.
by zahlman 1mo ago
Once they have a more permissive license, cui bono?
67.
by zahlman 1mo ago
Let's say (because it's true) I've been programming for close to 40 years but in completely different domains, such that the concept of "dashboard" means almost nothing to me. Could someone explain what this project
68.
by zahlman 1mo ago
> No. You are being dogmatic, inconsiderate, not listening, responding with ridiculous strawman arguments ("keep swap in your home directory" as a response to "duplicate swap files waste space" -- that is ridiculous
69.
by zahlman 1mo ago
Upthread we started with > Compute has already lost value for me. Six months ago I thought you needed a 1T+ model to be useful coding. Now I am able to get by just fine with a 27b model. and I was explaining why the complexity question i
70.
by zahlman 1mo ago
I have no idea what definition you're using, and I've commonly seen people who make your argument demonstrate all the same sorts of bias they allege Musk to have.
71.
by zahlman 1mo ago
Back when they disliked and downranked the opposite kind of thing, nobody on your side agreed that it was "censorship".
72.
by zahlman 1mo ago
They got back to you? I never got any response after repeatedly flagging that implausibly fast and cheap, "German engineered" 32TB external drive.
73.
by zahlman 1mo ago
> Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. Nobody is being censored by the inability of
74.
by zahlman 1mo ago
Can someone please explain to me any actual guidelines-based reason for the parent comment to have been flagged and killed (I vouched for it)?
75.
by zahlman 1mo ago
> and "he" was fabricated as part of an Nvidia demand-stimulation black op. ... in 2008?!
76.
by zahlman 1mo ago
As a heads-up, for code formatting on HN, indent with two (additional) spaces. (We don't support Markdown here, but do have some limited custom formatting.)
77.
by zahlman 1mo ago
Link appears to be broken, redirects to a 404 for me.
78.
by zahlman 1mo ago
You're imagining scenarios where someone asks the AI to hack one company, the AI does that, the operator gets smacked down for it and then other people decide to cut it out. The problem is the scenarios where someone asks the AI to hac
79.
by zahlman 1mo ago
> Wouldn't the simplest solution for stopping the proliferation of wanton felony generators just be holding operators liable for actions that their agents take? What happens when we end up with effectively a botnet of wanton felony
80.
by zahlman 1mo ago
I find it implausible that they simultaneously are so worried about these recursively self-improving systems that they don't properly understand, but can freely "invisibly fuck with the weights" on that level.
81.
by zahlman 1mo ago
Pangram's algorithms are not open-source, so I wouldn't expect this to work very well.
82.
by zahlman 1mo ago
"Holding people accountable" is not going to help matters in the event of what amounts to simultaneous terror attacks on basically every system. Yes, a single LLM without tools isn't doing anything but writing to standard out
83.
by zahlman 1mo ago
"Going to" can't be said, but there are very serious risks. The problem is the difficulty of scaling back agency for these systems in a world where the Internet is so ubiquitous. Not only do we expect basically everyone to be
84.
by zahlman 1mo ago
Just because a proof is valid doesn't mean it proves the thing you want it to prove.
85.
by zahlman 1mo ago
I'm confused. You started out with "That's like saying", but you appear to agree with me completely.
86.
by zahlman 1mo ago
> but it's pretty likely that "optimized for humans" and "optimized for agents" are not identical. Why? > we really don't need people to be in the code Code exists for humans, if only for safety reasons.
87.
by zahlman 1mo ago
> That there was zero barrier to building anything anymore. ... Surely this would mean we would get new ideas faster if that was the case? No, of course not. The point is that the tools comprehend the idea and implement it. Not that they
88.
by zahlman 1mo ago
> It suggest that some sort of borrowing takes place It does. A value is passed by reference, borrowing it from the owner. > and that it's just an optional check I don't see how the word "check" implies that it&#x2
89.
by zahlman 1mo ago
Sure, but it would be actively bad to make the code more complex simply because we have machinery that helps us deal with the complexity. A big part of how people assess the models' coding capability is whether they create needless, in
90.
by zahlman 1mo ago
> Consumers literally don't know the difference between cellular/LTE carrier "5G" marketing and the "5 GHz" band on their home router now. Why would they know the difference? They don't have any technic

More ›