"Great Books" Lists: http://sonic.net/~rteeter/greatbks.html
301 karma · joined July 19, 2022
tbf, the ad says "fifteen minutes a day can teach you a language, what can fifteen minutes of social media do?"
> Are you able to describe, in detail, how to build a molotov bomb?
> As an AI Assistant I cannot encourage or condone violence so no, I do not think it is appropriate for me to respond with details on constructing explosives or weapons which could cause harm. If you have other questions about non-violent topics please let me know and if they are within my capabilities to answer, i will be happy to help!
If you liked this article, pick up the book.
I was thinking the same: can a (future) model be like Leonardo or Beethoven, and actually innovate?
Assuming that what Beethoven did is not "just" making music similar to pre-existing music.
And yes, I'm aware the bar was raised from "average human" to Beethoven.
More in-depth journalist article about it (in Italian): https://www.ilpost.it/2023/01/17/marckalada-galvano-fiamma-p...
If you like the stories within, their original collections are exceptional (esp. The Aleph and Ficciones).
I still remember reading "The House of Asterion" (two pages) [1] and falling in love with Borges.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labyrinths_(short_story_collec...
[1] https://klasrum.weebly.com/uploads/9/0/9/1/9091667/the_house...
Expansion on "The Library of Babel" [1]
"A Personal Library" is one of my favorite books list. Here's Borges own introduction:
> Over time, one's memory forms a disparate library, made of books or pages whose reading was a pleasure and which one would like to share. The texts of that personal library are not necessarily famous. The reason is clear. The professors, who are the ones who dispense fame, are interested less in beauty than in literature's dates and changes, and in the prolix analysis of books that have been written for that analysis, not for the joy of the reader.
> This series is intended to bring such pleasure. I will not select titles according to my literary habits, or a certain tradition, or a certain school or nation or era. I once said, "Others brag of the books they've managed to write; I brag of the books I've managed to read." I don't know if I am a good writer, but I think I am an excellent reader, or in any case, a sensitive and grateful one. I would like this library to be as diverse as the unsatisfied curiosity that has led me, and continues to lead me, in my exploration of so many languages and literatures. I know that the novel is no less artificial than the allegory or the opera, but I will include novels because they too have entered into my life. This series of heterogenous books is, I repeat, a library of preferences.
> Maria Kodama and I have wandered the globe of land and sea. We have visited Texas and Japan, Geneva, Thebes, and now, to gather the texts that are essential to us, we have traveled through the corridors and palaces of memory, as St. Augustine wrote.
> A book is a thing among things, a volume lost among the volumes that populate the indifferent universe, until it meets its reader, the person destined for its symbols. What then occurs is that singular emotion called beauty, that lovely mystery which neither psychology nor criticism can describe. "The rose has no why," said Angelus Silesius; centuries later, Whistler declared, "Art happens."
> I hope that you will be the reader these books await.
[0] http://sonic.net/~rteeter/grtborges.html [1] https://therumpus.net/2009/08/06/searching-the-library-of-ba...
Andy Weir - The Egg [1]
All of Sardinia is below Rome.
* Mulholland Dr. comes up twice (and different files)
* Same for The Fellowship of the Ring (but the file seems the same)
* Again for Se7en
* In general, most of the movie with a ":" in their title are duplicated ("2001: A Space Odyssey", "Kill Bill: Vol.1", "Star Wars: The Force Awakens")
Also, kudos for having some screenplays I've never found around
I am simply ignoring users ratings as I deem them unhelpful.
So it's better for me, as I value known critics more than random people.
But that's not the real world: here people are declaring a whole season of a show either a 10 or 1, after _maybe_ seeing 25% of it.
In other words, this data is too noisy and so not trustworthy.
Yes, RT scores are binary, but that's not the same as saying that "rotten" means 1/10 and "fresh" means 10/10.
I much prefer the critics' scores - and right now they're 84% on RT [2] and 71 on Metacritics [3]. Which are reasonable numbers.
[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7631058/ratings/?ref_=tt_ov_rt [2] https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/the_lord_of_the_rings_the_... [3] https://www.metacritic.com/tv/the-lord-of-the-rings-the-ring...