elif

Addiction is a disease, not a "choice"

And "not ready to quit it at the moment" is such a wildly inappropriate dichotomy I really wonder what experience you have which informs your decision to discuss this topic.

"those germans just didn't have time"

That is a succinct explanation of the decoupling of human capacity for cognitive load with the expansion of global cognitive capacity made possible by AI agents.

Just as the creation of bulldozers decoupled the capacity for human labor from the global capacity for digging.

That is like crediting a fan posting on Twitter "he should run it in for a touchdown instead of taking 3 points" instead of the coach who decided and implemented a play which actually won the football game.

i suppose the correct retort would be to advise you to get your head out of it.

to certain people, it's all one-in-the-same. the real motivations behind this are a kind of existential human narcissism, a kind of denial-based coping mechanism grounded in a world-view that this industrial-revolution-scale change on society is somehow a passing phase.

I would say, because not everyone cares as deeply as you do.

If it's readable and aesthetic, it is perfectly serviceable for the purpose of reading a post.

Consider that you probably didn't have such an intense response to WIX templates or substack articles, so most of what's going on is actually your feelings about AI taking primacy.

if you can't answer the questions i'm asking there's probably a reason for it.

And i'm not the reason.

Do you also question why photographers list which lens they used to take a photo?

Look I get it, half of us actively hate anything produced by AI. Just like half of photographers hated anything taken by digital cameras

But there is a limited time window before the "I hate this" voice becomes a pedantic minority one. If the rate of AI progress doesn't show you a clear picture of what's coming, maybe it's time to reflect on that.

Easy. The turn of the screw by Henry James. Literally anyone who absolutely loves James primarily appreciates his descriptive form.

Another author that comes to mind is Zizek. His books could easily be reduced to a boring 2 page essay, but instead they are taken on a wild ride through cultural and theory and philosophical history and virtually encoded in philosophy jargon in order to absolutely reek of intellectualism. I'm 0% ashamed to admit openly that keeping up with him as I read makes me proud of my brain and attention capacity way more than I actually agree with his specific political philosophy in a work.

Funny how this advice is totally innocuous and accepted universally, but the idea that LLMs are trained on the exact same material causes half of us to scream about art theft and plagiarism and a legal right to royalties.

Now I'm curious how a 5th grade LLM would perform as a day trader

Think of it as an individual and instead of social property real property. If a person is stealing retail goods every day, no one asks "what should he do?" what he "should do" is face consequences until he is not a person who steals every day.

Just because the social property giant corporations steal is somewhat abstract doesn't change any of the fundamentals of right and wrong. I'm so tired of this ultra-capitalist "right to be massive" assumption which places the value of unhinged monopolistic growth over maintaining social commons. What these companies "should do" is face penalties until they can safely manage their scale, or scope their scale to a level they can maintain safely.

Remember when we thought the Turing test would be some mind blowing pinnacle of computer science? I do because I was in college in the early 2000's.

We flew right by that and now we are pretending it was no big deal. There is a lot to learn about psychological coping mechanisms deployed by humans desperate to maintain the illusion of absolute control

Maybe it's incoherent commands, or maybe it's guessing at what kind of names for commands the admins would use for custom scripts that they wrote, which could themselves bypass security layers or be exploited in order to?

It's hard to say for certain what's a waste of time for a machine that can operate virtually outside of time.

How do you hide the fact that they are honeypots from a super intelligence?

I'm so bored with the "are machines conscious" debate. The only thing it has proven is how desperately humans will continue to move the goalposts to the point of ontological collapse in order to preserve their internal sense of primacy.

You don't want to call machines conscious? Fine. Call it quasiconscious, semiconscious, technoconscious, whatever makes you feel alpha human, and move on to our current reality where we confront the existence of thinking machines rather than footnote it into obscurity.

The US government is the one who routinely spends trillions with no plans to recover money.

And SpaceX has become their favorite place to put money over the last 5 years.

$8.7B in losses over the last 5 quarters sounds bad, but that is also with $20.4B capital expenditure in the period and double digit percent increases per quarter in user metrics.

By traditional business metrics it looks toxic but compared to a typical tech unicorn it's not really outstanding.

Considering it's a tech unicorn with strategic and financial leverage like no other (their own global Internet infrastructure, access to arbitrary billions in capital, ability to build the biggest chip fab in the world), it's certainly fair to call it a gamble, but to call it failing is a stretch imo.

I'm gonna choose to believe they all involved AI in the design process and AI has a cheeky fetish for humiliating humans.

The decline you're talking about is roughly 168 to 145, or about 2.2% per year over 5 years.

That's hardly a death sentence. More likely just the gradual adoption of higher level frameworks and languages with less ugly parts.

Maybe I'm optimistic or not typical but in my experience people submit random PR to open source projects because they really want the project to do xyz for their own project/reasons, and the project doesn't do xyz.

And the PR is considered "spam" because the maintainer doesn't see xyz as part of his needs or his vision for the project.

There has never been a vote with any impact on the CIA whatsoever.

Here's an idea... How about we put constructive and intelligent people in charge instead of the most compelling narcissists.

I have no doubt the waterfall of bad news could be good news if society were properly engineered in accordance with our scientific progress, rather than in accordance to the easiest accumulation of capital.

You also have to factor in that your connection can drop to 10% far more often because of connection pooling. Each of your neighbors has a gigabit of bandwidth to use too.

Like in a perfect world, if everyone's cars went 10x faster, traffic would be a thing of the past. But because we can't have nice things, we would actually just be stuck in gridlock behind 10x more car crashes.

Nah literally crushing plates would feel so good. Worth the effort to melt it again every few sessions

In equally compelling results, my lawn mower does not cut grass to a uniformly random set of heights.

the argument that prediction models are sports betting is not much different than the argument that stocks are sports betting. Who's to say that capitalism isn't a competitive sport? I mean consider that people have agents making trades for them. It is basically a video game at this point.

I would say his post has the tone of earnest discourse while yours devolves into ad hominem laden reflexive sensitivity.

Which is the pathological take?

AI psychosis is real, but at worst is only premature. AI-denial psychosis is far more pervasive, and will bite far more people in the long run.

I doubt the amount of generators running constitute some sunstantial fossil fuel use, at least not more than 70,000 people sitting at home in air conditioning doing "nothing". I would welcome your math though.