sdwr

The more they share, the easier it is to exploit the system.

Great question! Clean separation between Gemini Pro and the other answers

Baseline demand affects the numbers much more than the unpredictable spikes do. You can come up with edge cases if you like, but the reality is that it all averages out pretty well with large volume.

And how are you supposed to guarantee equivalent functionality by analyzing "README files, API docs, and type definitions"?

It's very rational to overshoot in that situation. If you build your lifestyle and then FIRE, you are derisking your budget while you still have income.

But wanting to change your lifestyle when you retire is incredibly risky, especially if you're young without life experience.

Any misstep costs you a fraction of lifetime earnings, and there's no way to recover it.

Taste is definitely not overindexing on "it's not x, it's y" and accusing everyone who makes a comparison of being a bot

It's like any good cryptographic challenge - easier to validate the answer than to come up with it from scratch

Yeah, the execution is stronger than the idea and design choices as well, which suggests heavy AI support

It's a formalized, sanitized simulacrum of striving! Like sports is for competition

That honestly sounds great! If it works...

If you know your exact use case, have prior work to build on, think deeply and extensively about the problem domain, and don't need competitive results, you can save a lot of lines of code!

It's not bi-directional. When you friend jacques, you see people who he has friended as FoaF, not people who have friended him. It's a curator-style system, not a direct popularity one.

It's a fine argument, just rough around the edges:

Human brains use redundancy and the physical independence of neurons to build new pathways over time.

Current LLMs have no redundancy and brittle weights. Their technology and architecture fundamentally prevents them from learning.

I think our understanding of consciousness is developing as we build new edge cases. We have a machine that understands and reacts, but can't learn, grow, or "be" over time in a meaningful way.

The perfect information version calculates the path once on click, the local version needs to recalculate every time the unit moves (and new tiles are "seen")

Maybe human part inspectors should get treats for inspecting parts correctly

Awesome idea! The entity tracking is very exciting, most interesting part imo

I think the budget is noticeable in the sentiment analysis unfortunately, the tags and entity recognition are good but the sentiment ratings themselves seem pretty sloppy.

Yeah, or just the steam text guides would be a huge advantage.

I really doubt it's playing completely blind

Gwern is the nerd's nerd

I'm sure the goal is that reading files is something you debug, not monitor, like individual network requests in a browser.

An error message helps people skirt the restriction, by providing immediate feedback on what does/doesn't get flagged.

Same idea as shadow banning, ban waves, and generic errors for sensitive actions

> arXiv "emergent" (the count of AI papers about emergence) has a clear, unambiguous R² maximum. The other four are monotonically better fit by a line

The only metric going infinite is the one that measures hype

What does clean room mean in this context? They built it from the assets with the game as a reference , but didn't look at the engine source code?

It's very indirect. The message is "the government is soft on fraud, partially because of liberal values", but the author does everything possible to not actually say it.

All I remember hearing about this is how creepy and racist it was to look for kids at a black-owned daycare. It was a scam the whole time?

An AI "friend bot" could talk like an individual, but be controlled by a network that is making global decisions - what if one of its goals is reducing social unrest by undermining the confidence of users with certain political views? What if the network is 25% owned by China, or by Chevron? What if it's perfectly benevolent, but still choosing what to tell you based on its strategy?

I don't think it's pedantic, he's trying to make a broad point about his mentality, using the detail as the defining example

Informal, casual, friendly

It's absolutely the correct distinction to draw. AI will be able to present as a person while behaving as a system. We don't have intuitions for dealing with that.

They are way better at code-related tasks than design or strategy ones. Anything involving users or business strategy or a "why" is vague and misguided, they have no insight.

I think this is a backwards approach, especially for children.

Gen AI is magical, it makes stuff appear out of thin air!

And it's limited, everything it makes kinda looks the same

And it's forgetful, it doesn't remember what it just did

And it's dangerous! It can make things that never happened

Starting with theory might be the simplest way to explain, but it leaves out the hook. Why should they care?