spywaregorilla

You assume they all shared the same tech stack

The pension funds are protected, but that does not mean anything close to your promised benefit is available for you to receive. It also creates a recurring liability that the company is on the hook for. This has historically worked out to cases where employees must either get a partial payout from available funds and tank the loss, or have the company fold and everyone gets laid off.

Pensions are a better deal until they catastrophically fail.

It's better to not gamble your retirement on the assumption that your company will be solvent in 40 years. That's not really antagonistic in any way.

Is that really kids liking history or is that kids thinking war is cool?

History is also largely a joke subject that's just interesting fun facts and dry US history repeated ad infinitum for most american grade schools.

I would say the only history class that was actually of any value for me in high school was AP modern european history.

That's not unreasonable if you have good tests that hit the right elements. My experience about 10 years ago with the AP exams were very positive. The tests were good, and even though the classes were taught to the test, they were some of the best classes I ever took.

Building a ship containing delicate sensors that needs to get into space, arrive at the target, and beam back measurements on the first try with a very low tolerance for error is hard.

A quick google suggests to me that smoking trends are still falling in the US and globally on average. imo smoking is considered lame to americans as a sign that someone doesn't have their shit together.

What exactly is it? I get the sense it's basically a knowledge graph and an inference engine. But what was it actually doing in terms of submitting queries and spitting out takeaways in human readable form?

I'm extremely skeptical about the anecdotes about the game as an indicator of this thing's competence. It sounds unlikely that this thing actually encoded any sort of game state or nuanced simulations and was really just spitballing on vague strategies that just happened to find some cheese (twice?). I'm guessing they had to play the strats until one of them proved valuable, and it's kind of weird and surprising that they thought this was a good use of their time and model.

> during pre-training, there is never an incentive for the model to say "I don't know" because it would be penalized. the model is incentivized to make an educated guess

The guess can be "I don't know". The base LLM would generally only say I don't know if it "knew" that it didn't know, which is not going to be very common. The tuned LLM would be the level responsible for trying to equate a lack of understanding to saying "I don't know"

Can you identify any of these models?

I remember playing one of these a decade or so after it came out. Found out there were hookers and a prompt on whether or not to have safe sex. Despite my attempts, I was unable to receive any penalties for ignoring the prompt.

My point is not that you missed on some sweet cash. My point is that it's an example of extreme privilege and wealth opportunities that most people cannot afford. The post comes off as anti-materialism and worldly and not caring about the money. But it's really the opposite. Your particular circumstances around wealth are what enable you to do this.

I find it irritating. And phrases like this one:

> I looked around at the people that had been the 10 or 20 years and it scared the shit out of me.

Are the worst.

If you didn't work for two years, the cost was "less than a used tesla" and two years opportunity cost of missed wages.

Neon Genesis is moreso Christianity as an aesthetic.

Those poor fools and their 11 digit lifetime revenue figures

I really feel like epic games should be paying games to let people use their consistent character across games. It doesn't need to be significant. Just the metahuman mesh.

> 5. A negative view would be that AI coding assistants mean people don’t necessarily need “libraries” like this if an LLM can spit out the same results in a couple queries (rather than hunting around Github or the internet for pre-packaged code).

Why use a library when the LLM can spit of a unique reimplementation of the library logic every time you need it?

The future is terrifying.

Well, a battery is going to boost it substantially

Well, that claim isn't true.

Solar + Storage is cheaper than a gas peaker plant, but it is not cost competitive with a base load gas plant.

Gas is being subsidized

11k for my house in MA net of a few thousand in subsidies last year.

I don't think I really believe your quote of 40k. Does that even break even on energy bill savings?

What is this exactly?

The front page doesn't make it clear to make what ibis is besides being an alternative to pandas/polars.

So you're saying the engineers were totally grounded and apple business leadership was not.

Do you have any evidence to suggest the engineers believed that?

Hardly a discovery given that it's just the exact same thing as always but sure

I struggle to imagine what you're saying. In the old days if you had 100 monthly listeners that meant you were likely getting on your local radio station at great effort. You had no shelf space at the record store. You were not searchable on the web. The long tail seems irrefutably better served by modern methods.

Artists struggling to make a living on the back of a single success is, if anything, a product of the longer tails of music being a catered to. The gains are much more spread out now.

It's maybe a niche argument but I'd suggest looking at the one hit wonders of today vs yesterday: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_one-hit_wonders_in_the...

imo the one hit wonders of yesterday were fairly significant hits. The one hit wonders of the 2010s are vastly more ephemeral in my personal opinion. Probably mostly driven by the fact that they used to be conveyed by pop radio and now I don't hear pop radio EVER. But I also have some doubts that most of these 2010s songs will be able to carry a band forward like the one hits of the 90s.

In the old days, hipsters flocked to music with small fanbases of 10,000 or so. Current technology permits us to target down to those in the size of hundreds. And yet, post-hipsters now demand single digit numbers. Scientists hypothesize we may achieve sub-fan levels of popularity at some point, but at what cost?

I don't know what people expect really. Discovering music that resonates with you is not easy. I find spotify gives me about one band I really like every two months and I think that's actually really good. I dislike the vast majority of what it recommends, but I don't think that's a problem.

At least with spotify I regularly get sent into artists with triple digit numbers of monthly listeners.

Isn't uber is profitable these days with no qualifications?