One of the biggest impacts of LLMs right now is probably in programming. The article says that the only thing LLMs are doing is replacing stack overflow (and hence the value is the value of stack overflow). While it's true it does replace the need for stack overflow in many cases, what it is doing is making programmers much more productive. How much? I don't know. But the value is not that we don't need stack overflow, it is that we don't need as many programmers.
I wonder about the same thing in general for people taking this drug. I think the reason some people are overweight is because their body is asking for that much food not for the sake of caloies but to get adequate nutrition. (I am not sure what fraction this would apply to.)
I don't think the backlash is about one person as much as it is the direction of the company. Doing something for the good of humanity is all well and good, which seems to be the boards position, but I think they really need to test themselves in the market if they want to make something good. And then there are the employees and the investors who would much rather see more money come out of this.
As CPUs get faster, memory gets bigger, screens get bigger, networks get faster and everything keeps getting better, one component of the systenm is not improving - the developer's brain. I think it just comes down the the fact that software is hard and bigger software is harder.
I got very lucky. My first guess was only off by 5.5 miles. If I knew the exact location ahead of time I probably couldn't have gotten that close if I tried, considering the zoom level of the map when I guessed it. That got me close enough to get right on for the second guess.
When you look at quantum mechanics from Schroedinger's equation point of view, it is very simple. The implications of it are not, which is true of many simple systems. What is difficult in quantum mechanics is trying to understand how those equations have anything to do with what we see.
The path integral interpretation actually does give us an intuitive picture of why we see classical physics. If you zoom out, the stationary point of the Lagrangian is all that survives, with other things mostly canceling out as you mentioned. This explains why in lagrangian mechanics of clasical physics we are told, without reason, that the equations of motion are the stationary point of the Lagragian.
You don't say this, but I think people think quantum mechanics is weird just because it is different from what they see. People also had trouble with the idea of us moving around the sun, one reason being because it looked like everything was going around us. Of course, if we did go around the sun, it would still look like things went around us. In the end though neither is really true. The sun in the center is just a better model. Likewise, quantum mechanics is probably just a better model to "reality" than classical physics.
This is something that clicked after a few hours rather than a few years, but it is similar in a way. A long time ago when I was a graduate student I was in the library one afternoon studying some idea in field theory (physics). It covered maybe three pages in a small book, but it wasn't making any sense. Finally, hours later it suddenly became clear, and it was so simple. I remember saying to myself, "Why didn't they just say that?" I looked back at the book and they said exactly what I would have said. I guess sometimes words are not enough.
What strikes me from reading this, aside from of words like "user" and "tarball", is how short the list is. Given that, inclusion on the list seems almost arbitrary. I don't think they have put much work into this yet.
I'm not sure why this was downvoted. I did leave out one thing - I think the Ghana government is making a statement that they don't want to transact in dollars. That is an important difference, but it is not related to the monetary dynamics.
I don't think it is different, apart from any issues with timing of the buying and selling and price changes in between. I think this is more a question that the government doesn't have the gold and buying it from the miners is how they will get it. I don't think they are giving the miners a bad deal, other than forcing them to accept Cedis. I believe the net effect is that fewer Cedis are put on the market for dollars and this prevents a price drop in Cedis.
I didn't see this said in the article explicitly but if the index funds start selling rather than buying, stocks like Apple will probably be OK, but some other stocks that have been propped up by the index funds may have no bid and they can crash. This of course leads to more people exiting those stocks and potentially a vicious spiral. I supposed this could also effect the whole index.
I'm not exactly sure from what perspective you ask this question. As far as I know people misspeak when they say to minimize the lagrangian rather than find the stationary points (min max or maybe saddle). Applied to classical physics in the absence of quantum mechanics I don't think there is a good answer. It is just a rule. But, when combined with qunatum mechanics, it explains how classical physics is an approximation to quantum mechanics.
In the path integral formulation of quantum machanics, the evolution of a wave function from state 1 to a later state 2 can be thought of as occuring as a superposition of all possible paths between the two states, with each path contributing a factor of exp(iS) where S is the lagrangian. This means all paths either obeying classical physics or not.
In situations where classical physics is valid these contributions from different paths changes very quickly. The contributions from neighboring paths cancel each other out except at stationary points in the lagrangian, where there is a zero change between neighboring paths. Hence, we see classical physics are the trajectories that are the stationary points of the lagrangian.
US Healthcare system is very good at what it does. It just isn't doing the right thing. Looking at it another way, the US healthcare system is far better at bringing in revenue than any other country's healthcare system, but like a factor of two.
Wage inflation could accomplish this without forced redistribution. I’m hoping we get out if this with more wage inflation than price inflation, but monetary authorities don’t have the control to get a good outcome here (regarding inflation), and business is against it.
When I started the article I thought it would be completely misguided, but there was a lot of good information inside. I just don't agree with the emphasis on counting calories. As the article says, we are bad at it. But supposing we could do it perfectly, then what is the right number we should ingest? Besides, we eat for more than just calories. Nutrients are more important. Your body might tell you to keep eating after you get enough calories because it is missing something else.
Our body has an amazingly good, built in mechanism to control what we eat without us consciously tracking our input. The only problem, as mentioned in the article, is some modern foods throw off our system. So don't eat those. I don't find avoiding processed foods or even foods with processed sugar a sacrifice in any way, at least from a pleasure point of view.
Disclaimer - eating refined sugar gives me headache so maybe that makes it easier. (Fruit does not give me a headache. Fruit cooked in the oven at high temperatures to caramelize the sugars does. ? )
I like the saying that people overestimate what will happen in a short time and underestimate what will happen in a long time. 50 years or longer would be a more interesting period of time to measure changes.
I subscribe to a different take on what has happened to interest rates the last 40 years. I think market driven rates have been going lower and the fed has just responded by lowering their rates.
With interest rates so low, money is poring into the stock market driving it up. This is helping the wealthy. But I also think the interest rate problem is caused by wealth inequality, with more invested money chasing fewer productive lending opportunities, and this is because more money is in the hands of savers and less in the hands of spenders.
I personally am hoping after the inflation rate comes back down we see larger net wage inflation than price inflation, returning money to the hands of the working class. (Of course, it would be tricky to push for this too much as a policy because we certainly do not want to cause a wage-inflation spiral. I don't think that is a given though. As they say, the best cure for high prices is high prices.)
Is the fediverse a new social network or a concept? I think there is hope for it as a general concept if, for example, the US government gets mad at someone like Facebook and requires them and other social networks/messaging platforms to make their content available through standard interfaces. It could be something like RSS for posts and other appropriate standards for chat, audio calls, video calls, etc. Then someone on [insert fledgling social network here] could "follow" someone on Facebook and someone on What's App could text someone on WeChat.
I interpret the heading of the graph (not Marc Andreessen's tweet) to say there were 40% fewer small businesses opened on June 2, 2021 compared to Jan 2020. I assume that now we are exiting the pandemic the number is much higher than June 2021.
I like the way you say that. I was going to say that Ann can push to split the pizza 7-5 if it is OK that she is being an a@#hole. If not, she should split it 6-6.
I think the author makes a good point in the article, but he should have at least mentioned future ramifications.
Just to make a counter point, we only know when this doesn't work. We don't know the times people relied in diplomatic solutions rather than suffer these consequences.
For better or worse I think that is often the plan. First, presumably the government cares about the welfare of its people. Second it can make the people unhappy with the government.
There is something I don’t like about Face ID. The phone does not have the button press to know when to turn the screen on so it tries to guess. It often turns the screen on for no reason, and then buttons on the screen can acidentally be pressed. It often turns my music off or turns my flashlight on and I end up walking around with my pants pocket glowing.
Turning the phone to face away from my body helps, and is the opposite of what I used to do.
I assume someone would prefer developing on whichever machine they normally use.
I have been a windows user for a long time and recently started working on a mac to write some iphone code. It is agonizing, but presumably not because there is any problem with macs, but just because the systems are different. Using the cmd key instead of the ctrl is the most obvious difficulty, but I can't say that makes macs better or worse.
One thing that really got me while using the mac is I was adding a file to my project and I double clicked on a folder to navigate into it. Coming from a pc this is what you would do. You also do that on a mac in other places. But here it inserted the folder into my project. I won't get into what happened when I deleted the folder from my project.
Using a system you are not familiar with sucks, whether it is a mac or a pc.
Other than this, is there something I don't know that makes developing on a mac so much better?