mrbgty

If LLMs are capable of writing code and code is what they are created with, what's keeping LLMs right now from entering into a loop where they are themselves creating new AI with more advanced concepts than we've ever known?

> it seems there is conclusive evidence (LLMs) that quantum explanations are not necessary to explain at the very least linguistic intelligence as advanced linguistic intelligence is possible in a purely classical computing domain

Any reference explaining this? It isn't clear to me that LLMs have proven advanced linguistic intelligence

As with most things in life, there's an appropriate balance somewhere. People tend to say anger = bad because we have mostly experienced inappropriate anger on one extreme and have found that it isn't healthy for you.

What is the moat for AI? Right now, it's enormously expensive to produce an LLM but doesn't AI produce results which, in the long run, will make it easier and easier for any company to produce the same?

Fair enough and all points I agree with

Not a very friendly comment and I didn't think electric vehicles needed oil.

Vehicles are doing more and more processing - the work of servers. Distributing moving servers around the world to process data at that specific location is useful and becoming more and more so.

Can you think of any applications for having servers primarily used for processing data on location that are distributed around the world in locations that normally can't have buildings sitting there or that might benefit from moving with traffic?

I'm not sure how obvious it was or that it still won't happen in the future. Cars have been becoming more and more like a computing device.

Good points to think about. One I consider is that traditions and family roots are often good for people to feel connected and find meaning although traditions should be questioned from time to time.

I think having family members of varying ages alive at the same time does help people feel connected, safe, and confident in having meaning and purpose. (Not that people can't have those things otherwise, it's just without that support)

Important note in the faq

"This strain doesn't do anything to protect against gum disease, or bad breath."

companies buying up property drives prices of homes up

they are operating under a completely different model than individuals and can more easily shoulder paying more now in order to make up for it later.

kind of like two people playing the same game with a different set of rules.

Yeah. The easier money is to get, the more willing people are to pay higher prices.

There might be a 0 to 1 issue (people stuck at 0 need some kind of traction) that is at least improved in a practical sense with a small UBI although we still need productivity to continue increasing in order to drive prices down

Wouldn't it be easier to put a lot of smaller objects between the Earth and Sun to reflect light rather than one big one?

Curious why they don't seem to be stacking them up or making them taller? Wind? Shade?

If they were on a pole allowing the wind to turn them, could you get both wind and solar power at the same time?

Maybe building more doesn't get your out of the cycle. Maybe it helps. Personally, I've only visited Seattle once and don't have any desire to return to live or visit. I would likely be happy taking up space in the MidWest that the rich young professionals are leaving behind.

I only think that there's usually a balance to things that sometimes require a lot of time to pass in order to correct.

Anyway, I appreciate all of your responses and your perspective.

No, I don't think I'm suggesting that Seattle build a house for everyone in the US + immigrate; only maybe that there is some curve where building more doesn't result in increased demand.

I don't see why some would have more of a right than others to live in a place on a baseline level and at the same time I don't think it would be right to force people out of their homes just to make it fair to everyone to have a chance to live there.

If a place is desirable, the people who were already there are more likely going to be the ones who have been contributing towards making it a desirable place to live than ones who were not already there.

Sure, things can be made more efficient one way or another. But why are single family homes unsustainable?

That demand can't go to infinity, though, right? I would think the new arrivals would be stimulating factor to build more houses, on the economy, produce new tax dollars for roads, etc.

Does that mean there's a lot of empty houses in Seattle?

Curious. Why are single family homes unsustainable?

Yes. Difficult doesn't mean good.

something tells me that if the contestants that used the bonding cement had taken a mortar approach, they would have still finished in half the time as the other two :)

“For a decade, in streaming, an enormously valuable amount of quality content has been given away well below fair market value.”

I'm not sure they understand how fair market value works.

As if individuals don't have plenty of choices?

That's a wild generalization

How will the company stay in business without workers?

They'll have no choice...

what happened with your company?

Yeah, it doesn't make a lot of sense to send water directly down a hole without getting filtered at all through layers of earth.

>If you are an individual developer, the leverage it provides might be 10 times greater, but when you work for a company, that number might be only 2

These numbers are arbitrary and if you're looking for leverage, a company with a lot of customers is a good way to find it.

The smart companies are going to be using these layoff opportunities to hire good people.