buttercraft

> everybody using LLMs a bunch of noobs

That wasn't even the claim...

I, for one, find it very practical.

I do a lot of thinking by visualizing relationships between concepts in a kind of graph. When I draw, I visualize the scene first. When I build widgets in my wood shop, I visualize the result and all intermediate states. When I was writing 3d renderers (a long time ago), it was immensely helpful to visualize the points and triangles in my head.

This only works on a desktop? Is there any way to interact with it on a phone?

That was exactly my experience, and I found it to be a little bit depressing.

You might have a better point if the elected person hadn't made such a big show of following "mandates" from the voters. You can't have it both ways.

There's also aye/nay but I don't think I've ever seen those in code

There was a pride festival recently during which people were wearing rainbow clothing and waving flags. Do you think all of those people are part of an organization with leaders and "cells" or whatever? Or, maybe, they were all just expressing the same sentiment and using flags and colors and badges to do it?

> Why do you think that intelligence of a Turing-complete system trained on human data can be likened to a Russell's teapot?

I don't? You are presenting opinions as if they are mine, but they are not.

I did not express my opinion or "worldview." I was simply responding to this:

> exclude LLMs with CoT from the category of intelligent systems with certainty

The incident would not have happened without Flock misreading the small numbers in the middle of the plate as it tracked them around town.

The point is that you're asking someone to prove a negative.

"Flock’s AI tech wasn’t registering that non-standard little number when it began picking up the Range Rover around town"

That sure sounds like an accuracy issue to me!

How do you know there's not a teapot orbiting the sun?

> someone points out wasteful expense

This is the very thing under question in this thread! You have drawn a conclusion and are using your conclusion as an argument in a circular manner rather than engaging with what other people are arguing.

"Other people disagree with me, therefore I am right" is the dumbest thing ever.

>> My thing is, how healthy are ecigs compared to real cigarettes really?

> Use empiricism

> Smokers or former smokers who switch to e-cigarettes may reduce their exposure to carcinogens and lower their risk of developing severe health issues associated with conventional smoking.

That's true, ecigs introduce different types of risks:

Wikipedia: "The recent rise in the use of electronic cigarettes, many forms of which are designed to be refilled with nicotine-containing "e-liquid" supplied in small plastic bottles, has renewed interest in nicotine overdoses, especially the possibility of young children ingesting the liquids."

And not just ingesting, but absorbing it through the skin.

Also: "Serious nicotine poisoning seems normally prevented by the fact that relatively low doses of nicotine cause nausea and vomiting, which stops users from further intake."

Option A: nicotine.

Option B: nicotine plus a lot of really bad stuff.

You're seriously questioning which is better?

The poster up thread said people were being arrested for "mean tweets" and now you've moved it to "but those death threats weren't serious!" No, the original claim was dishonest bullshit.

> I don't care about the life history of the author to enjoy a good fiction.

But the fiction is a product of the author's lived experiences. If the author had lived a different life, they would have written a different book. Or none at all. Without life experience, where would stories even come from? Why would they matter at all?

Nah, even if you fail miserably, you'll still get a nice payout and retire comfortably. Hell, you can even commit crimes and the company will pay the fines for you!

They're not asking for IDs. The user simply has to declare their age. I'm not happy about any of this, but there is no "verification."

It sure sounds like there's no liability if the user lies: "An operating system provider or a covered application store that makes a good faith effort to comply with this title, taking into consideration available technology and any reasonable technical limitations or outages, shall not be liable for an erroneous signal indicating a user's age range..."

> moves when you try to move away the mouse over it

They already did that. I sit down at my computer and try to activate the window I want to work in, and the "location" icon temporarily appears in the notification area which causes all the taskbar icons to shift left. I accidentally click the neighboring icon and launch an app that throws up a splash screen for 60 seconds while it loads.

That is apparently false given this situation

In other words, understaffed agency goes for the low hanging fruit

While it's good to question what you read on the internet, you're making me realize how dire the situation really is. If someone targets you with AI, you can't even defend yourself without being accused of making it all up for attention. There's no way to win this game.

This is in the context of not knowing the entity behind the application, and evaluating it on its merits alone. I'm not convinced that's a bad thing. Kindof like evaluating a resume without knowing the name or gender of the applicant.

Cities are bound by laws, and not complying opens them up to lawsuits which the taxpayers pay for. Sure, maybe that's in the best interest of the community in some cases. However, I think it usually happens because people have feelings and biases rather than as a calculated move.

Right, because zoning and state laws forbid those things.

I'm not sure. Cities are supposed to approve or deny applications based on whether they comply with zoning, codes, parking, water availability etc. They can't deny based on who or what the business is alone. A city near me is dealing with a lawsuit for exactly that.

It probably varies from state to state, I don't know.

I've been playing them for 35 years and I don't share your opinion at all.

> between a federal officer and a suspect

The "suspect" being the person standing alone who was sent flying backwards whens an officer approached and shoved with both hands? Why was that justified? Was that an "arrest" or physical assault?

The whole thing was completely unnecessary.