ralusek

It appears to be a law that is simply adding restrictions to what the state can do (like the first amendment, the best sorts of laws IMO). It’s not granting people limited rights. Any existing rights people had under the fourth or first example, for example, are still in place, this just sounds like further restrictions on the state.

> toward LLM-based AI, moving away from more traditional PyTorch use cases

Wait, are LLMs not built with PyTorch?

Using HTML Tables doesn’t just make your data sortable

And it’ll be so good and cheap that you’ll figure “hell, I could sell our excess compute resources for a fraction of AWS.” And then I’ll buy them, you’ll be the new cloud. And then more people will, and eventually this server infrastructure business will dwarf your actual business. And then some person in 10 years will complain about your IOPS pricing, and start their own server room.

YouTube shorts now eat up like 2/3 of my UI. I hate them.

I think that Thiel would actually like this. Both because it's progress in the "world of atoms," as he says, but also because it's "blood boy" adjacent.

> since I only use AI for issues/problems I don't understand

I only use [coding assistants] for problems I DO understand.

I woke up, didn't focus on self care, didn't take medication, and got fired immediately. That doesn't feel very realistic

I work on a kiosk (MedifriendRx) which, to some degree "replaces" pharmacists and pharmacy staff.

The kiosk is placed inside of a clinic/hospital setting, and rather than driving to the pharmacy, you pick up your medications at the kiosk.

Pharmacists are currently still very involved in the process, but it's not necessarily for any technical reason. For example, new prescriptions are (by most states' boards of pharmacies) required to have a consultation between a pharmacist and a patient. So the kiosk has to facilitate a video call with a pharmacist using our portal. Mind you, this means the pharmacist could work from home, or could queue up tons of consultations back to back in a way that would allow one pharmacist to do the work of 5-10 working at a pharmacy, but they're still required in the mix.

Another thing we need to do for regulatory purposes is when we're indexing the medication in the kiosk, the kiosk has to capture images of the bottles as they're stocked. After the kiosk applies a patient label, we then have to take another round of images. Once this happens, this will populate in the pharmacist portal, and a pharmacist is required to take a look at both sets of images and approve or reject the container. Again, they're able to do this all very quickly and remotely, but they're still required by law to do this.

TL;DR I make an automated dispensing kiosk that could "replace" pharmacists, but for the time being, they're legally required to be involved at multiple steps in the process. To what degree this is a transitory period while technology establishes a reputation for itself as reliable, and to what degree this is simply a persistent fixture of "cover your ass" that will continue indefinitely, I cannot say.

I JUST had a very intense dream that there was a catastrophic event that set humanity back massively, to the point that the internet was nonexistent and our laptops suddenly became priceless. The first thought I had was absolutely hating myself for not bothering to download a local LLM. A local LLM at the level of qwen is enough to massively jump start civilization.

> incoming president of Oxford Union

> debated Kirk [at Oxford]

> cheered assassination of Kirk, which happened within months of debate

Is this really dragging American culture war into things? This is clearly relevant to Oxford

speedrun when?

If a robot costs $50k, lasts 5 years, and does the dishes and laundry every day, I'd consider it.

Why should it be progressive if it's not even scarce there? Why are you trying to punish people unnecessarily?

Definitely the case. That being said, I think it would be hard, at least in the immediate future, to translate the concept of difficulty to a universal LLM for a bespoke/specific game. I assume most game AIs are tuned by hand to feel fair for a given difficulty level...but if you just give an LLM some new game, explain the rules and what resources/abilities it has available to it, you're stuck with adding some addendum to the tune of "and you're meant to represent an entity of 'medium' difficulty." For very well established games, it might have a sense of how given actions might fall into a skill-level hierarchy, but not for anything new.

Fine tuned LLMs though with actual experience with the game, maybe?

The real jump was 3 to 3.5. 3.5 was the first “chatgpt.” I had tried gpt 3 and it was certainly interesting, but when they released 3.5 as ChatGPT, it was a monumental leap. 3.5 to 4 was also huge compared to what we see now, but 3.5 was really the first shock.

It’s not obvious that the most profitable path for OpenAI would be saving on costs, it might be that the model is actually tuned to overthink because they can charge on those extra thinking tokens.

It's interesting, because I was always a bit confused and annoyed by the Giant's Drink/Mind Game that Ender plays in Ender's Game. It just always felt so different to how games I knew played, it felt odd that he would "discover" things that the developers hadn't intended, because I always just thought "wait, someone had to build that into the game just in case he happened to do that one specific thing?" Or if it was implied that they didn't do that, then my thought was "that's not how this works, how is it coming up with new/emergent stories?"

This feels almost exactly like that, especially the weird/dreamlike quality to it.

They're not even in the same ballpark as the SOTA models, and they're not even in the same ballpark as the SOTA open source models, which was supposed to be their niche.

But even if they were, it's not immediately clear how they plan to make any money with having an open source model. So far, their applications of their AI, i.e. fake AI characters within their social media, are some of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard of.

To play devil's advocate, I think there is some merit to their point. A common criticism against modern academia is that so much of the low hanging fruit has been addressed, that to be an expert working on the actual frontier means your "leaf node" of focus/progress is so so specific, that it's not at all uncommon to be somewhat blinded to the broader consensus/lower resolution version of the greater tree of knowledge.

The experts of the kind to which you're presumably referring, who are much more tapped in to the whole state of a broad branch of knowledge, often end up being more "science communicators" than people on the frontier of research. The thing is, though, that these "science communicators" often end up being (or start off being) more akin to a papers/Wikipedia jockey than a credentialed academic actively working in the field. So in that sense, someone who "knows a lot about dinosaurs and can effectively write about them as the broader field currently perceives them" need not necessarily be a credentialed expert.

Does anybody else have an issue with the like $8/user/month price point that products like this have coalesced around? I feel like a service like this should be like $1-5/user/year, at most.

Speaking for myself: one reason would be because it's one of the things LLMs/tools like Codex are the most useful for.

When I have a smallish application, with tests, written in one language, letting an LLM convert those files into another language is the single task I'm most comfortable handing over almost entirely. Especially when I review the tests and all tests in the new language are passing.

> The benefit of choosing a dodecahedron is that it is the platonic solid with the lowest vertex curvature, and by this measure it is the most spherical of all the platonic solids. This is key for minimizing cell distortion as the process of projecting a platonic solid onto a sphere involves warping the cell geometry to force the vertex curvature to approach zero. Thus, the lower the original vertex curvature, the less distortion will be introduced by the projection.

This feels like an uncommon need to optimize for. Can't think of a reason I would reach for this over S2 or H3

Google manages tech debt by throwing away products after a couple of years

Isn’t 2.5 pro significantly cheaper?

> If you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide

Ok but in not hiding anything, we all apparently do a lot "wrong."

I'm a gardening and landscaping enjoyer, but I am constantly confused about the bordering magical thinking surrounding dirt, among other aspects of growing things.

If you look at hydroponics/aeroponics, plants basically need water, light, and fertilizer (N (nitrogen) P (phosphorous) K (potassium), and a few trace minerals). It can be the most synthetic process you've ever seen, and the plants will grow amazingly well.

The other elements regarding soil health, etc, would be much better framed in another way, rather than as directly necessary for plant health. The benefits of maintaining a nice living soil is that it makes the environment self-sustaining. You could just dump synthetic fertilizer on the plant, with some soil additives to help retain the right amount of drainage/retention, and it would do completely fine. But without constant optimal inputs, the plants would die.

If you cultivate a nice soil, such that the plants own/surrounding detritus can be broken down effectively, such that the nutrients in the natural processes can be broken down and made available to the plant, and the otherwise nonoptimal soil texture characteristics could be brought to some positive characteristics by those same processes, then you can theoretically arrive at a point that requires very few additional inputs.

A world of slop increases the demand for products that help you discern.

Are Democrats constantly in violation of the constitution, and openly hostile to the first amendment? Yes.

Does that make any of this acceptable? No. And a good deal of this is even more concerning.

Best models for search, in order:

OpenAI Deep Research

Grok Deep Search

Gemini Deep Research

Grok + Search

Gemini + Search

ChatGPT + Search

These are just my opinions, but I do use this feature all the time. Haven't used Claude enough to get a sense of where it would fit in.