djaro

Because many children will have parents that arent responsible and that doesnt mean they deserve to be taken advantage of by a billion dollar corporation.

This is famously why ID checks at the liquor store led to the government eventually requiring a mandatory ID check anytime you walk the dog or go to the beach... except none of that happened.

I mean, even if more things on the internet get restriced it wouldnt affect me since Im not a minor.

> Has it occurred to you that nobody cares, or should care, about your opinions about what other people and other people's kids do?

Uhmm... Yes they do? That's... the whole point of living in a society? With laws? So we can collectively decide what is and isn't desired?

Children are also banned from purchasing alcohol or going to the casino. There are tons of things we collectively decided children shouldn't do.

The problem is many parents will not do that. Do those children then deserve to be taken advantage of by social media corporations?

Generally, things that are harmful and addictive such as alcohol, cigarettes and casinos require age verification. We dont just put the onus on parents because a child with bad or absent parents still deserves to be shielded from alcoholism at 12 years old.

Age verification has always existed in the physical world, such as at bars and casinos. I just dont see why the internet should be immune to real world rules we decided upon for good reason.

Some scalpers will move to the black market. Most will quit. People dont want to go to jail.

There is such a thing as general intelligence which differs between different people. Arguing that IQ isn't real because IQ tests are imperfect, is like arguing in the year 1500 that temperature isn't real because all thermometers are imperfect.

Our lack of ability to precisely measure something does not mean the underlying thing is not real. There is such a thing as general intelligence which correlates strongly with almost every type of performance and life outcomes.

This still can't show that my red is your red, only that my red is on the same position of my color wheel as your red is on yours

But its frequency still rose by over 300x since the start of the chart, which might suggest that for some people it is a basic color term.

"English" isn't one monolith. Every English speaker speaks their own version, some closer to each other than others, and new features are constantly being added or removed.

To use math as an example, you can always look up formulas. But after more than 1 "layer" of looking up, that quickly becomes impossible. Like, when I had to learn to calculate derivatives and primitives, I could look those things up. But when I got to linear algebra, I couldn't progress until I deeply internalized derivatives and primitives, because looking up formula A only for it to contain unknown formula B just becomes a mess.

It's valued at $1T by people who do not have $1T.

Yup. Even if Anthropic spends that $40B back at Google and thus the money ends up there, Google is still out of $40B worth of compute or whatever the profit margin is on that.

It's why eating at your own restaurant is cheaper, but still not free.

I had this exact realization. Taking chords from a chord progression generator, putting it into FL studio, adding a random melody that stays in the key from a cool synth preset, some random drum loop, and end result? I guess it could be called music. Its a combination of sounds that doesnt sound actively bad.

I noticed the problem when I realized I couldn't make music in a specific mood or genre. Sometimes I'd finish my song and think "oh wow, a happy rock song" or "a sad edm song" or whatever but it was always just random chance where I ended up. With music theory knowledge I could always add more instruments or notes that could exist in that place but with 0 direction, whatever I made was always listenable but never more than that.

Over hundreds of hours of actively using AI for basically every area of my life, it has just never actually achieved anything besides giving me the feeling of productivity.

Ideas are mediocre. Plans are arbitrary. Research is untrustworthy. But telling it "generate me 100 ideas for X" feels really productive.

I think a version of me with no access AI will not just stay competitive, but even outcompete the version of me with unlimited access to AI.

Theres no reason to assume that. Its equally likely trying to replace jobs with AI is the "little crusade" thst no one cares about and will fail.

This is only true if the new technology is actually significantly useful. Which so far AI has not proven to be. Theres no reason to assume people using AI will, on the long term, outcompete those who don't.

I dont think that would teach you much. Theres a reason that math textbooks for high schoolers have one theorem, and then a whole chapter of practice problems. Simply reading how to do something doesn't teach you how to do it, you have to experience it again and again.

If AI actually becomes good enough to replace intelligent people. Which, outside the online world of AI hype, is not at all a commonly accepted fact.

> So if Bob can do things with agents, he can do things.

The problem arrises when Bob encounters a problem too complex or unique for agents to solve.

To me, it seems a bit like the difference between learning how to cook versus buying microwave dinners. Sure, a good microwave dinner can taste really good, and it will be a lot better than what a beginning cook will make. But imagine aspiring cooks just buying premade meals because "those aren't going anywhere". Over the span of years, eventually a real cook will be able to make way better meals than anything you can buy at a grocery store.

The market will always value the exact things LLMs can not do, because if an LLM can do something, there is no reason to hire a person for that.

The problem is that LLMs stop working after a certain point of complexity or specificity, which is very obvious once you try to use it in a field you have deep understanding of. At this point, your own skills should be able to carry you forward, but if you've been using an LLM to do things for you since the start, you won't have the necessary skills.

Once they have to solve a novel problem that was not already solved for all intentes and purposes, Alice will be able to apply her skillset to that, whereas Bob will just run into a wall when the LLM starts producing garbage.

It seems to me that "high-skill human" > "LLM" > "low-skill human", the trap is that people with low levels of skills will see a fast improvement of their output, at the hidden cost of that slow build-up of skills that has a way higher ceiling.

In which case, if LLMs can perfectly one shot simple programs, creating and maintaining a really advanced program would presumably be very cheap since it could just one shot every feature. So instead of generating new image editing programs for every task, why not pay $10/month for the guy who spent a week guiding an LLM into making ultra photoshop with every feature Ill ever need?

Also, as someone who's main source of income is a YouTube channel: there is a type of threshold effect, where your videos are not good enough to watch until one day they suddenly are.

This means that until you reach that threshold, it feels like you're not making progress, cause every video just gets the same result (no views). Even if below the surface, you're slowly inching closer to that moment where your videos will actually be watched.

I've noticed this getting a lot worse recently. I just want to ask a simple question, and end up gettig a whole essay in response, an 8-step plan, and 5 follow-up questions. Lately ChatGPT has also been referencing previous conversations constantly, as if to prove that it "knows" me.

"Should I add oregano to brown beans or would that not taste good?"

"Great instinct! Based on your interests in building new apps and learning new languages, you are someone who enjoys discovering new things, and it makes sense that you'd want to experiment with new flavor profiles as well. Your combination of oregano and brown beans is a real fusion of Italian and Mexican food, skillfully synthesizing these two cultures.

Here's a list of 5 random unrelated spices you can also add to brown beans:

Also, if you want to, I can create a list of other recipes that incorporate these oregano. Just say the words "I am hungry" and I will get right back to it!"

Also, random side note, I hate ChatGPT asking me to "say the word" or "repeat the sentence". Just ask me if I want it and then I say yes or no, I am not going to repeat "go oregano!" like some sort of magic keyphrase to unlock a list of recipes.

I think it's just because hours spent learning by children often don't look like work to us. Like, when children are watching children's television or looking through those baby books with shapes and colors, they are studying. To them, that is learning. And I guarantee that in 1 hour of studying, I can learn every single color in Spanish, whereas a baby might need months of daily reading to finally understand it. But because we don't register it as studying, we would still say the baby learned language "effortlessly", while adults need to "study".

Because what we call electricity is electrons moving. So it would make sense for electrons to have the electric charge.

Now we are in a weird situation where current flows from positive to negative, but electrons flow from negative to positive. It would be a lot more logical if the direction of the electrons was the direction of the current, but the name was arbitrarily decided before we knew what electrons were.

People also said cigarettes were bad, or lead pipes.

"People say [thing] is bad, but completely different people 50 years ago said [other thing] was bad" is not really an argument

If you asked 100 people, literally everyone would agree Arnold Schwarzenegger is more attractive than Danny Devito. For people in the middle it's a bit more subjective but there are people that are more or less attractive.

I doubt there is any overlap between "unbanked" people an people who can buy EVs

Found one with 6 degrees of seperation:

Geronimus Polynomials -> Aenictus Raptor

You need to pick something that is only linked to in its "parent" article. So for example Aenictus Raptor is only really linked to on the Aenictus (genus) page, which is almost only linked to by the Ants page.

Don't do anything related to countries, because almost every article lists a country. So it's easy to traverse between them.