He's missing the point. The fight against tech is not more tech.
It's regulating tech.
1,445 karma · joined April 12, 2012
It's regulating tech.
I've been able to do 80% of what I needed to do remotely with that setup, so wondering if a more complex setup would really add much...
The article is baseless and fluffy
But it's not because "some statistical model exhibit a bias that's similar to the result" that this implies "therefore the result is a statistical error"... that's a backward reasonning
The two lines on the graph are basically linear (for the "actual performance" the quasi-linearity is obvious by the design, for the "estimated performance" it still means that even though dumber people over-estimate their performance, all group still think they do best, when they actually do best, in a relative linear way)
And when they do their simple model (we assume they just generated "real performance" from a gaussian, then added some gaussian noise for the "performance" and another gaussian noise for the "self-assessment") they still (obviously) got two linear graphs that crossed each other.
And then they conclude that this means there is no effect, because "the graphs are eerily similar" (whatever that means)
But obviously the simple model is going to make two lines cross (in particular if you use a min(100, max(0, actual_performance + noise)) since at each extreme, then min and max will tend to skew the line). To put it simply: someone really stupid will STILL not pretend that he's "negatively stupid".
The argument "I can make a simple model without using actual humans which shows some kind of bias that vaguely ressembles the result of a paper" doesn't mean that the actual paper is wrong...
It's not like we hadn't been warned by decades of sci-fi work, and researchers, and historians, telling us everything that would be wrong with AI
> I'm taking off nights and weekends for the first time in a decade, solely because of the speed up of LLMs
No you're not. You could very likely organize your life to have your nights and weekends without AI. It's just a choice you made not to do it before
The most interesting thing in research is finding new questions, that we understand and that we know why they are important. And that's something that humans need to do (by definition)
Plus, once you sent your battery, they either discard it which is not ideal for the environment, or try to remanufacture it, which is very dangerous when it's done on a battery which wasn't designed for it, like ours
We are also looking for bike-shop owners who want to train on our batteries (it can be learned in one hour or so) to get a new revenue stream by offering to repair and assemble our batteries!
Cells aside, cars have very good suspensions, and their batteries have been designed with very pricey component to eliminate shocks and vibrations.
On e-bikes, most batteries will have to sustain those, and we've seen a LOT of commercial batteries who were out of order for a simple $5 electronics component which was broken, and which couldn't be replaced because the battery was not made to be repaired (soldiering, glue, etc)
For the Whispering dev: would it be possible to set "right shift" as a toggle? also do it like VoiceInk which is:
- either short right shift press -> then it starts, and short right shift press again to stop - or "long right shift press" (eg when at pressed at least for 0.5s) -> then it starts and just waits for you to release right shift to stop
it's quite convenient
another really cool stuff would be to have the same "mini-recorder" which pops-up on screen like VoiceInk when you record, and once you're done it would display the current transcript, and any of your "transformation" actions, and let you choose which one (or multiple) you want to apply, each time pasting the result in the clipboard
For OsX there is also the great VoiceInk which is similar and open-source https://github.com/Beingpax/VoiceInk/