johndhi

as a lawyer, I'll just note that the legal system has standards for this. specifically, you can't delete stuff that poses legal risks to you once you reasonably expect a lawsuit about it. but you can delete it as part of normal business activity until that point.

This is fun though I sort of wonder if it's attacking a straw man. Are there any reconstruction folks who defend these?

Makes sense. This is basically how skilled painters of miniatures (Warhammer) do it.

Can you share some prompt examples you use to try to ensure it doesn't get "lazy" and just cherry pick from here and there?

I have a written novel draft and something like a million words of draft fiction but have struggled with how to get meaningful analytics from it.

But added "annually"! That's a lot better!

Why do we need long running agents? Most of my experienced value with LLMs has been like 1 to 10 turn chats. Should they just ban longer chats to solve these issues?

Good luck getting rid of LLMs

Names and IP addresses are like 1% of what meets the gdpr definition of personal data.

But how do you actually do that?

Protecting users in the bargains we strike with big tech is a worthwhile and noble effort, but privacy law has generally woefully failed to do this.

Millions upon millions have been spent on cookie banners -- people are still arguing about them in this thread -- but there is almost zero benefit to this expense.

The main thing that's good about this, IMO, is that fundamentally training a large language model and privacy law as it's written today cannot coexist. They are incompatible. And allowing someone to break the law forever (as is happening today) is not a good long-term solution.

Lot of interesting views in this thread.

One thing I loved from Osho (spiritual guru) is the notion that everyone thinks they are "extraordinary" but actually the happiest person is the person who is ordinary. Being ordinary and just eating breakfast and sleeping and doing a job is - in fact - extraordinarily rare.

Thanks for posting. Every time I've read a RLS book lately I've been blown away by how entertaining and well done they are.

Treasure Island - pure gold. Kidnapped - gold.

I recall in the introduction to one of them he explains he wrote these stories for boys. Adventure, danger, fun characters. If you have sons you'll know there is a certain aesthetic young boy love and these books deliver it.

I also was amazed how much I enjoyed his books for adults, like the one about being on a ship as a kid (can't find the name).

If you look into his biography you find some really hard things that I guess he transformed into writing.

This article (with limited data I'll note) only talks about the first part -- that it's eliminating jobs. It doesn't say that it isn't also creating jobs.

LLMs have only been a big deal for 2 years. are you saying that all of this middle class shrinkage arrived because of that specifically? the original comment was saying this is an LLM-specific issue.

>LLMs and robotics look to be the first mainstream technological development in a long while which not only reduces the number of workers needed, but also doesn't have a commensurate increasing of the size of the economy in terms of increased wages through efficiency and profits being paid as wages

What is your evidence of this?

presumably if they become as popular as software, they would...

I'd think it would be allowed for UK to:

1. Tell 4chan or its registrar l to take down .co.uk urls (maybe?)

2. Tell UK ISPs to ban UK visitors from viewing 4chan

I can trust a hammer will be a hammer, though.

I feel like one benefit of humans is you can find someone you can truly trust under almost all circumstances and delegate to them.

With AI you have a thing you can't quite trust under any circumstance even if it's pretty good at everything.

Not a crazy idea. Sergey at Google said it's best at replacing managers fwiw

You really think governments could write rules that would help this?

The only rule I can imagine is big penalties for data being breached, no matter the cause, but do we actually think it's a multi million dollar problem for 70k photos to be released? Hard problem.

I run a team of about fifteen people and for whatever reason I've never really understood or driven toward legibility. What's the point? For me getting to know and trust each person and to develop an understanding of what they are good at is the key thing I focus on. Good work follows.

Actually knowing minutiae of what they do seems like make work to me.

surely it's the goal of most pricing strategies, though, right?

I agree it's really sad and fucked up. But the way we deal with murder is long prison sentences and the death penalty. If we introduce horrible incentives for investing in medicine, we won't get compassionate care, we will just eliminate investment in healthcare.

We need really thoughtful incentives and simple policies that let doctors run hospitals. Idk it's hard - I was going to say we should reward them for providing better care but I know the pay for performance system in place also hasn't worked that well.

I hate the US healthcare system but I don't support using the word murder in this context. Murder is very very different from trying to help a person but being greedy while doing it.

With no queen how could they reproduce down there after the originals died of old age though?

I spent last night bemoaning the sad internet culture of negativity and sarcasm and hatred... But this post made me laugh.

I understand your argument, but why should we believe you, rather than advertisers spending millions of dollars, that this other form of ads is more effective than what they do currently? Your solution seems easier so it's hard to believe they're not doing it for some good reason.

>America has slowed the speed of Chinese AI development by a tiny number of years, if that, in return for losing total domination of the GPU market.

I'm open to considering the argument that banning exports of a thing creates a market incentive for the people impacted by the ban to build aa better and cheaper thing themselves, but I don't think it's as black and white as you say.

If the only ingredient needed to support massive innovation and cost cutting is banning exports, wouldn't we have tons of examples of that happening already - like in Russia or Korea or Cuba? Additionally, even if the sale of NVIDIA H100s weren't banned in China, doesn't China already have a massive incentive to throw resources behind creating competitive chips?

I actually don't really like export bans, generally, and certainly not long-term ones. But I think you (and many other people in the public) are overstating the direct connection between banning exports of a thing and the affected country generating a competing or better product quickly.

By this logic wouldn't people in nyc, London, Washington dc, and Paris be living extra long?