Mbwagava

Whether or not Meta wins this case, I'm never going to support any government that supports both LLMs and IP. Like we have to put up with IP despite having no clear value to a digital society but as soon as it becomes inconvenient it goes out the window? Nah, let's just trash the state and start over.

It's going to take centuries to undo the damage wracked by IP-supported private enterprise. And now we also have to put up with fucking chatbots. This is the worst timeline.

Eh, not a fan of puts. It doesn't add any value over write or printf and it should be named "printLine".

But if you're still using raw libc in 2025 that's a problem you willingly opted into. I have zero sympathy.

I don't the US government is representative of any kind of advisable behavior. Perhaps if they weren't doing stuff that makes people want to murder them we wouldn't have to light piles of cash on fire to protect the perpetrators.

How is this comment any better than the attitude its commenting on?Just live your life, you want to take pictures do, you don't don't, you want to post your whole life in Instagram do. Life is whatever you want it to be.

> They are the first to notice how many people around them are taking pictures or posing or looking "ridiculous", worrying how themselves would look if they did the same, sometimes wanting deep down to do the same but held back by their own perceived judgement of others potentially turning on them.

This is incredibly arrogant & entirely projection.

Are the apps usable? The jargon seems intentionally impenetrable. The editor of that document should be shot every time they used an acronym. Like i get the DOD is a profitable dick to suck but this is just embarrassing for a document intended for the public.

Anyway can you link the source? That's presumably the useful half. The marketing bit doesn't add anything.

I don't think diplomas have mattered for decades, at least in tech. Let's not pretend anything improved with the introduction of chatbots.

Annyway, any advantage is entirely offset by having to live in a world with LLMs. I'd prefer the tradition of having to educate retarded college graduates. At least they grow into retarded adults. What are we gonna do about chatbots? You can't even educate them, let alone pinocchio them.

Apprentices were supported, tho. We just chuck kids out in the cold with college debt and hope they survive with little reason to think they will.

Ooh ranked gaming, too. Also any kind of market activity.

Why haven't people bludgeoned them into opening their software if its so useful? This is inevitable; in fact you could measure the long-term efficiency of an industry by how quickly this happens. Movie studios are famously bad at spending money (yes there are exceptions, but they can be counted on one hand).

Ok, sure. In neither case was such a world a product of imagination.

I can't read the tone of this post, but "AI" as it stands as a marketing term for the last ~45 years has little to do with rigor. These are workers producing profit, not scientists. Ethics has nothing to do with it. Scientists deal with empiricism, not sales.

> If all we were interested in was moving the weights around, you’d be right to use a tool to help you.

Does the use of a quantifiable metric like a GPA not exacerbate this? In a world where people take a GPA seriously, you'd have to be irrational to not consider cheating a viable option.

You could say the same about credit score and dating apps. These institutions assist the most predatory and harm the most vulnerable.

For those completely lost on what MCP means: https://www.anthropic.com/news/model-context-protocol

It's not clear what benefit or use this is intended to provide (presumably they would have detailed its functionality if they intended to communicate this), but I assume it's ~super meaningful. I assume it's~ a scraping endpoint to add a url.

Edit: can't figure out how to use strikeout; please interpret the tildes as such.

Yea but the world they created wasn't one anyone wanted or asked for any more than our own reality caters to us; it is intended to portray life as it was in the nineties. To accept this as ideal is to accept that we currently live in an ideal world, which is extremely difficult to accept.

Do you have the link to this alleged government-produced e2e software so we can inspect ourselves? I realize they have an incentive to appear incompetent, but surely there must be evidence (further than your testimony) of such gossip popping up somewhere

Planning for and expecting are not the same thing. This is just a bad-faith interpretation.

Tbh, I am surprised this isn't possible. One would assume sampling a signal is the fundamental property of working with hardware.

> which is mostly in glutamergic cells in the shell of the nucleus accumbens(s)

i'm not really convinced this is any better fit for "reward" than other explanations. What evidence is there that such a reward system exists in the first place?

Well yea as soon as someone starts acting like humans communicate well, let alone the mind-reading behavior you're describing, I'm completely lost.

Sorry, which points did you find contradictory?

Yea but you'd need some sort of argument why class intersects with how archers are characterized when they are. At best I think you might say "we don't know".

It's not even clear "superintelligence" is a meaningful concept. It could be that the broad conflicts in our society are largely intractable and arbitrary, in which case "superintelligence" can do little but complain about the contradictions its passed (something I suspect many on this forum can understand).

Perhaps the calculator is as close as we'll ever get to "superintelligence".

> Why are aesthetics in media and elsewhere converging towards a homogeneous blob of everywhere-consistent, but meanwhile politics has exploding into a kind of anything-goes mess where there is consensus on nothing

This seems contradictory to me:

1. Liberal politics is all aesthetics. This is why people claim proudly to be moderate regardless of what two political stances they're alleging to moderate between. If you look at actual policy differences between the two parties there's mostly just wedge issues. 2. Our perception of politics is straightforwardly dictated by newsrooms.

In fact, the retreat from consensus to internal peace displayed in this post seems consistent with the liberal (by which I mean both parties) defense of individualism over collective/social responsibility.

You can turn off message disappearance with the app store app so this seems like a red herring.

How does this happen when signal itself is open source?

Unbiased seems like a pipe-dream. Unbiased between which perspectives? Would the set of perspectives chosen not be de-facto bias?

I suppose spell checking is a sort of literal error correction. Of course this does require a correct list of words and misspellings to not be on that list.

At some point we just need to acknowledge that such speculation is like asking for a magic genie in a bottle rather than discussing literal technology.

It is the natural progression of trying to figure out how to slow down computation without providing additional value.

I don't think this is as crazy as it first looks. For instance our values are largely arbitrary. Perhaps you can justify them with rationality, but generally "don't hurt people unnecessarily" seems like something I'd expect most people to get on board with without justification, and is also something I'm 100% ok with being arbitrary.

But you need to be honest with yourself about why you believe what you believe about the world. We all have contradictory beliefs (and sometimes values), so it's only a matter of time before you catch yourself believing in stuff not rooted in your values. This could be harmless, or it could be destructive to yourself and the people around you, or it could allow people to have an unhealthy degree of control over you, your behavior, and how you perceive and interact with the world. All good advice still requires good faith interpretation, and some people aren't going to do that. How much are we supposed to concern ourselves with people who don't try to understand us?

And in general, I'm pretty damn skeptical of anyone who roots their identity in political alignment. Like I'm pretty firmly on "the left", but it's not like I walk around identifying as an anti-capitalist, which is such a broad and vague term I can't control how people perceive it even if some will take me in good faith. And that's still dozens of layers above the values that actually inform my political alignment, and there's a lot of bad-faith actors who appeal to political alignment to get you to work against your values basically in every aspect of society. It's still up to you to notice this and care.