jadenpeterson

There's a bilingual relationship between the responsibilities of the state and the rights of the consumer. That point you describe - where they'll tackle the root problem - isn't coming. In truth, these are feel good measures anyway - naive attempts to fix a downstream problem that won't pan out. That's my opinion, anyway.

Yeah it's not the... best. I bought it kind of on a lark, and the sunk cost made me reluctant to let go it.

Any brand recommendations? I'm really not one for 'smart' features, though I know they're kind of intrinsic to electric vehicles.

Oh this is awesome. I think I remember using this guy's stuff for remedial biology (or chemistry?) in HS. Thanks for the link.

This is tricky. Anecdotally, social media has made my cousin much stupider - seriously, he’s begging me for help with stuff as basic as calculus (admittedly, I can’t help him here since I’m not good at math, but still…)

I wish there were free online resources for adults with remedial math needs…

How did they accomplish this without a PM reminding them to get alignment?

No LOL. Zyns are nicotine pouches you insert into your gums for a gradual release of nicotine. They're powerful. Unfortunately, I went from using 3mg Zyns to 6mg Zyns, and had to sit in front of my bathroom sink, fighting the urge to retch. Be careful with them, but they're a good way to ramp up to cigarette smoking

Why are they comfortable saying this?

> Generally, Boyd said his office uses the software to find “avenues for obtaining probable cause” or “to verify reasonable suspicion that you already have”—not as a basis by itself to make arrests.

As if that's not a massive violation of our rights in and of itself. This is my fundamental problem with the internet. As much as stories like these gain traction, as many millions of redditors protest these increasingly common stories (for example, the suspicious nature of Luigi Mangione being 'reported' in that McDonalds), nothing will change.

Perhaps this is the part of the criminal justice system I am most suspect of. Is this what happens in a country with less regulation?

I can't be the only person completely unconcerned about this state of affairs. They're ads. This is the most straightforward incentive structure in the world - they are paid to supply ads on behalf of other companies, and we consume those ads and are, in turn, provided with their product. I don't know why it is, but people are incapable of evaluating this exchange objectively - there's something inherently detestable about advertisement to the human mind. This is a perfectly reasonable exchange.

Besides, if it wasn't for ads, I never would've found out about Zyns, and now I can't stop buying them.

There's some nuance. IQ tests measure pattern matching and, in an underlying way, other facets of intelligence - memory, for example. How well can an LLM 'remember' a thing? Sometimes Claude will perform compaction when its context window reaches 200k "tokens" then it seems a little colder to me, but maybe that's just my imagination. I'm kind of a "power user".

Not to be a luddite, but large language models are fundamentally not meant for tasks of this nature. And listen to this:

> Most notably, it provides confidence levels in its findings, which Cheeseman emphasizes is crucial.

These 'confidence levels' are suspect. You can ask Claude today, "What is your confidence in __" and it will, unsurprisingly, give a 'confidence interval'. I'd like to better understand the system implemented by Cheeseman. Otherwise I find the whole thing, heh, cheesy!

For my 11th or 12th birthday, I got a pet porcupine and I was ecstatic. It was my first pet, and I spent hours researching what they eat, what habitats they like, etc. I carefully curated my room to accommodate him (him being 'Sonic'), even keeping it clean for the first time in forever so I wouldn't lose him amidst the mess of soiled undergarments and such. He loved it, and I loved him. Of course, it made no difference when my uncle sat on him on Christmas morning. We rushed him to the vet, but they told us his scans showed fractures on several vertebrae or something like that. We took him home, and waited for him to die, but the waiting was too painful. I'll spare the details, but what transpired next involved my dad, his shovel, and a lot of tears.

About an hour later, we got a call from the vet - they'd misread the scan, and Sonic was gonna be fine. I think I was traumatized at the time, but the whole thing later became an inside joke (?) for my family - "Don't kill your porcupine before the vet calls" (a la "Don't count your chickens before they hatch").

I guess my point, as it pertains to Cursor, its AI offerings, and other corporations in the space is that we shouldn't jump the gun before a reasonable framework exists to evaluate such open-ended technologies. Of course Cursor reported this as a success, the incentive structure demands they do so. So remember - don't kill your porcupine before the vet calls.

I mean sure, this is trivially true, but there's some nuance here. For example, I could find slop in the above threads. Ultimately, while slop, we have to focus on outcomes. If they produce content with some truth in them, they're truthful, regardless of whether an AI agent did or didn't write them. As for 'eyes to see', I think ignorise is bliss here. If a tree falls in a forest, and someone sees it but can't understand the tree has fallen, what's the point discussing the demerits of felling trees?