kylemaxwell

My 8th-grade science project was doing a "statistical" analysis of X/Y/Zmodem transfers (and Kermit, I think?). It did well enough to get me to the county science fair here in Dallas, at least.

And yeah, Zmodem was mind-blowing for us.

This was my first exposure to an internet (as opposed to the Internet), via BBSs, when I was a teenager. I keep thinking we should bring the term "sysop" back, in fact.

Nostalgia may be a form of depression, I've been told, but a little touch of it once in a while is good for the soul.

I mean, I'm not really senior management, just an EM trying to get through life under the rules somebody else made.

Also, this isn't about SLA at all.

Every time somebody questions why you might "trust" AWS (or Azure or GCP or whatever), or why you'd pay this premium, I realize they are not accustomed to working in enterprise environments.

In my case, I work at a large enterprise with strict data governance built into customer contracts, and (partly related, partly not) our own governance concerns. Using vendors where you not only have infosec permission, but they are also listed as data processors in our contracts with our customers is the way not to get fired and sued.

If I'm playing around at home, with my own code and data, I can do whatever I want. But with my employer and customer? Absolutely not. It's the same reason we don't use whatever is the flavor of the month frontier model is.

Side hustles and startups just have an entirely different set of constraints and considerations.

At this point, I want somebody's raw(ish) writing, with spelling errors and grammar mistakes and whatever, at least when it comes to most writing: blog posts, Slack messages, etc. LLMs are great for helping generate ideas, writing code, and maybe even cleaning up some writing, but doing the writing overall? Please don't. I want to hear what you have to say, not what the AI says, if it's something along those lines.

There's no moral universe where shooting somebody over money, especially this amount of money, is the correct course of action.

From the abstract, it looks like it's actually doing something deeper, updating weights in part of the model?

My dad (retired network engineer) has ChatGPT, but when he asks me about something, he's trying to keep a connection with me. I value those moments.

"Disregard" showed me this article, but "disregard previous" yielded:

> Understood. I have cleared our previous conversation context.How can I help you today? Feel free to ask a new question, or let me know what you'd like to work on!

The downvotes are for the unnecessarily aggressive approach, even from people without a major dog in the fight.

In Texas, you could probably paint a rainbow around it in the morning and the governor would have somebody on it that afternoon.

/s

Corporate policies and agreements. In large corporations, using external non-approved models with proprietary source code is a good way to have significant career issues.

I played the hell out of the original DOS game during high school in 1992 (or thereabouts, it's been a while.)

I uh... well, I agree with your last sentence.

> As long as the forked project makes the relationship (or lack of relationship) and support expectations clear, I'm not sure what this battle was about.

This is what it’s about: the forked project was NOT clear about the relationship to the original.

I like the ideas, but either it’s entirely LLM written or the writer has internalized “LLM voice”. At this point that is more distracting than helpful.

Both can be true: we can have different preferences about what we're doing to put food on the table and what we're doing when we build something on our own for other reasons.

Everything on that page has two nines, so not sure what you're trying to say here.

I generally agree with your stance about the situation in eastern Europe, but there's no particular reason to connect that to this incident. There's no public evidence that this was state-sponsored or even connected to Russia at all. They definitely provide sponsorship and cover to a lot of attacks, but still are not the only source of online crime. We have plenty in the US and the UK and everywhere else.

He was not a good person. He was one of the great writers of this age. Two things can both be true.

You cannot have peace without justice.

This is a terrible article about what sounds like a legitimate problem. Even in the section, "What is Chat Control?", the answer to the question is buried in the middle of the seventh paragraph.

If the writer of this post wants people to oppose it, they really should do a better job of explaining at the very top what "it" is.

The question makes as much sense to me as "why teach literature in the age of typewriters?" Not that the analogies are perfect, but the idea that it's not worth learning something because a related technology has advanced significantly is a non sequitur.

There may be good reasons to learn or not to learn calculus, or literary theory, or anything else, but the existence of some related technology isn't it. I'd go so far as to suggest that perhaps calculus is even more important for some folks to learn in the age of AI (e.g. applications in neural networks), and we don't know who those folks will be in advance.

I got all excited thinking this was related to real-world archaeology and somehow providing a git-like representation of that. (No idea how it would work, which is why I was excited).

Absolutely, but you suggested that it was because you hate to turn off music and then walk out.

That's not much of a disability-related use case to insult me about.

These look like fun technology, but I don’t even know what the use cases would be anymore. I don’t need something to control my lights: I have an actual light switch for that. I don’t have endless terabytes of media that I need to serve within my household, so I just don’t know anymore what I would use this stuff for. Twenty or thirty years ago, I loved having a home lab, but these days I’m just not sure what I would do with it.

I swapped from Linux to MacOS when the M1s came out, and I love the integration with all the iCloud stuff (particularly Messages). Occasionally I miss being on Linux, as somebody who did so for 20+ years before making the switch. But on Mac, stuff actually does Just Work.

Reading this makes me a little misty-eyed and I miss my solid old Thinkpads from 10-20 years back.

The point is that you call the LLM to generate the code that lets you talk to the API, rather than writing that glue code yourself. Not that you call the LLM to talk to that API every time.

The article talks about that at the end, then says:

> Let models talk to each other directly, making their own case and refining each others’ answers. Exemplified in patterns like Multi-Agent Debate, this is a great solution for really critical individual actions. But XBOW is basically conducting a search, and it doesn’t need a committee to decide for each stone it turns over whether there might not be a better one.

In general, this seems reasonable to me as a good approximation of what works with humans, but with _much_ faster feedback loops in communication.