habinero

Someone else quoted a 14x increase in load due to AI hammering github. I wouldn't be at all shocked if that was true, considering how much AI tools are DDOSing the entire internet.

That plus migrating clouds is insanely difficult to manage. They're almost certainly drowning in traffic and trying to keep up.

Now you have two problems lol, in that you don't know if the tests are any good or actually test the thing in question.

Sooner or later you run out of turtles to put on the stack.

Nah. You can succeed in every single individual thing but fail at the overall project because the parts don't align into anything that makes sense.

If you need examples, look at game dev. There's plenty of games that have good execution but aren't fun to play or they're a confusing mess because there wasn't good overall direction.

We don't have sci-fi AI, and in any case "this thing is now possible, therefore [much more difficult thing] will be possible soon" is not a rational thought.

People have been talking about this for literally a hundred years at this point. It's not a thing and isn't gonna be one.

I mean, it is. Textiles are a technology. Extracting usable fiber from plants or animals was something we invented, so is making yarn. Knitting was invented, and shaping cloth to a foot was too. And then there's the modern side of automation. There's a lot of sophistication that goes into it.

The Dispossessed. If you like that one, you'll like the rest of her work.

Not a lawyer, but have friends who are, and the answer is absolutely not lol.

A lot of legal language looks like code, sure. It can be formulaic and full of terms of art ("actual malice" has nothing to do with colloquial malice, for example) but law just isn't code.

Laws themselves are basically human drama run through a compression algorithm. They get written by all kinds of people at all different times for all different reasons. Case law is also law, and that's hundreds of years of people fighting in court lol.

When you hire a lawyer, you're asking them to take all of that and apply it to your hyperspecific set of facts, in such a way that you'd probably win if someone wanted to fight you in court about it.

Also, the stakes in law are high. You usually get one (1) shot at litigating something and that's it. No do overs.

> 2) composition of the workplace will change (more women will elect not to participate)

What? Why on earth would it specifically hit women?

> Going with the possibly-hallucinated AI answer is rational as long as you know the hallucination rate isn't 100%

I hadn't even considered people might evaluate knowledge that way. That's legit horrific lol.

"What's the literal odds this info is wrong" vs "is this answer consistent with everything else I know, and if not, what other info would I need to change my mind"

> is it so surprising that people tend to trust it more

Yes and no.

I think most people would agree that Wikipedia is, on the whole, a pretty great first resource on anything. It tries to be factual and accurate.

Most people would also agree that Wikipedia can be wrong or manipulated and should never be used for an authoritative source.

And then somehow a computer barfing up words distilled from magic internet concentrate is absolutely trustworthy?

I don't get it.

If you ask that, you fundamentally misunderstand the point.

It's not about the LLM, it's about whether people will critically evaluate what it spits out.

And they can get you for theft, etc, if you do. Sometimes the social and legal controls are far more effective.

No, I don't have anything like that. I have a friend with diagnosed OCD and that is an entirely different beast. And I have tried cutting that stuff out (was never big on most of it anyway) and it did absolutely nothing for this sort of thing lol.

Tinnitus really is the best way I can describe it. I didn't even realize how pervasive it was until it shut off.

Yeah, that does nothing. I love to cook, and I can cook super healthy and like it. I'm still hungry lol.

There's a part of my brain that constantly thinks about food. It's like tinnitus. GLPs stopped that cold.

Why? There's zero prizes for unnecessary struggle. It doesn't make you a better person, it just means you struggled more.

Yeah, I posted elsewhere about it, but GLPs instantly switched that feeling off like it was throwing a breaker. It's wild.

It's more like...you just don't want them? It's kind of wild. The first week I took them, I discovered there was a loop in my brain that was constantly thinking about food, and I never realized until it got switched off.

That's the best way I can describe it. I could basically always eat before and now I just...don't feel like it lol.

I will say, they are rough when you first start out on them. During the 1st 6-8 weeks I had several instances of maaaaaybe five seconds of warning between feeling nauseated and vomiting.

It settles down after a couple months and it was never bad enough to be a dealbreaker, but it's a fun time.

Why? They both get you to the same place, and one is vastly more likely to work. I don't get the weird moralizing around this.

Not...really? It's pretty normal. Tech companies share intelligence and knowledge all the time -- there are a lot of birds of a feather and consortium groups out there.

Since a lot of places are close in proximity, companies sometimes run private fiber lines and such to let peers download updates without competing with the entire world lol.

Everyone's fighting the same fight. Sharing and collaborating are normal things.

Silicon Valley is not as large as it might seem, and knowledge sharing and consortiums and working groups happen a lot.

You can complain about supply chain problems, or you can actually try to work on it. They're trying to work on it.

Threatening to revoke the rights and freedoms of your fellow citizens and put them in a hellhole is pretty antisocial and sociopathic behavior, my dude. That makes me suuuuper uncomfortable.

Oh no, better throw you in jail so I don't have to think about you. Don't mind the moldy bugs in your food, that's just extra protein.

Considering that's where all the people and money are in this country, it's clearly not a problem for most folk. You're entitled to your outlier opinion, of course.

I'm hearing this high pitched sound, does anyone else hear that?

I clicked and scrolled through several of those studies, and those snippets are incredibly misleading. I would recommend not using these in debates, unless you want to come across as a poor researcher acting in bad faith.

The very last one says nothing about genetics at all, that's saying the justice system is biased.

The second to last is part of a much more nuanced section talking about environmental impacts and the role that can play in biological expression. It literally says:

> Thus, just as biological mechanisms can influence environmental responses, environmental stressors can affect biological expressions.

I stopped reading at that point.

There's nothing to discuss? Clearly this is someone who doesn't want to communicate, and politely asking them to go elsewhere is appropriate. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Mmm. What have you done to make sure you're not letting your ideology lead you into misinformation and misunderstanding?

In my experience, people who get mad about "decolonization" tend to either not understand what's actually being discussed or they got ragebaited by something inconsequential that they've blown up to ridiculous proportions.

I assume you don't think you're somehow immune from this phenomenon?

Can you go spread your weird obsession somewhere else, please?

I hate I can't tell if you're joking without checking posting history lol

It's a real term. It's a Agile metric for measuring how much a team is shipping over time.

Whether or not the whole concept is wanky bs depends on who you ask lol. It's useful if you measure it over time, not so much otherwise.

None of the exTwitter people thought that if you talked to them.

Sometimes, people talk about what they hope will come true. I dunno what to tell you.