strulovich

Are they saying it right now?

I think CEOs could honestly say it a year ago, but by now the numbers of those who say so should be dwindling.

Recent surveys by BCG and others suggest things have changed.

Personally, I know many people in different fields who’ve seen crazy speed ups in many of their tasks.

- find piece to buy to repair an appliance

- travel research for places where I need an apartment with requirements one cannot just filter for

- gardening tips based on photos of my plants

- financial planning (similar tips to what I would get for more money, without paying per hour until I know much more)

- take photo of all physical spam and have me removed from the list

and many more…

If the access to this product went away I will survive, but it will be annoying and waste my time.

I’ve been purchasing more and more stuff from Walmart (good interaction with ChatGPT) and other stores.

It’s clear why Amazon is doing this from a business perspective, but this is a stop gap for them. They will need figure out a better plan for people using their agents.

I recently needed to buy some hardware for a piece of furniture.

Ran Codex, it found it for 18% less than what I found in the top Google results. It did it by finding smaller shops, applying a discount code, subscribing to a newsletter for a better code after approval, and took into account the shipping (by placing it in the cart and going to checkout) all to get me the best price.

I’m guessing without it I would have spent much more time on it and paid the original price I saw.

If you use AI agents well, they can easily save you more money than they cost, and saving money is something most people are pretty excited about.

(Disclosure: OpenAI employee)

The best trick I have after asking it nicely in all sort of ways is:

1. Have it build a scoring script that penalizes words outside a simple English list and approved jargon. Penalize sentences over 15 words as well. Add whatever else.

2. Run it in a loop to reduce the score while preserving intention

This works much better than other ways I’ve tried. Of course it costs more. And I would apply it only to the output to the user, not the thinking process (I think the AI thinks better with their crazy English)

Of course, sometimes nuance is lost by this process. That’s just the nature of making things simpler.

Aren’t Waymo prices above Uber’s? That’s what I’ve seen in SF.

That is to say that I don’t think the economics work. You’re better off offering free Ubers. And I doubt that will solve many issues.

This is not a very charitable explanation, it takes politicians at their word during a war. (One should not do that, and you can refer to Putin’s language at 2022 as a parallel example to Trump’s)

The initial US goals clearly were: 1. Regime change 2. Denial is of nuclear weapons

It’s also clear these goals were not achieved. So the US changed tactics and goals. (Same as Russia no longer plans on capturing Kiev it seems)

Most likely the US is stalling for time due to oil markets and has the same intentions as before, limited only by current capability.

Where I live (NYC) putting altered images like that has been the norm for more than a decade.

It’s just used to be more expensive to hire someone to do it for you.

The altered images always e free stirs the same bright walls and grey magazine style furniture.

AI is just making it cheaper, but this was bound to happen.

(Images altered this way do have a small watermark stating so)

The Linux kernel is not in any way at top of big projects. A kernel, as the name suggests, deals with specific issues and tries to remain small.

The world’s biggest software is usually built over endless adapters of different data and a need to reconcile endless edge cases with laws, regulations and real world complexities.

Now let’s see you do this with 40B. The f you can do that I will be intrigued, since it sounds like you solved a bunch of complicated economic problems.

The truth is that the backlash is stronger against E2EE.

Avoiding E2EE is less PR hassle to Meta than having it.

As a supporter, I must admit the E2EE interest groups have not had the upper hand recently (if ever)

They are blocked from insider trading

I think this in the previous comment undervalue just how many more complicated ways there are for corruption to bubble.

Assume super strict rules. Consider this example to circumvent them: Senator-elect A makes an LLC and invest their money (with some friends) in it (before taking office)

They can’t even talk to the money manager. But the manager can see their actions, and the senator can know their ow investments and work in their favor.

Recent research disproves the old limit which has grabbed headlines like that old half a glass of red wine is good for you paper.

And also. Up to a certain point is still a correlation. Getting a lot of downvotes by people not knowing what a correlation is.

Because research on this topic supports it. Happiness and wealth are correlated.

No they can’t just draw by themselves. It’s extremely bad and random.

Their teachers teach them from a very early age how to hold a carton, and how to draw.

Maybe some miraculous humans will reinvent all drawing of growing by themselves in the jungle, most people will not.

Source: I have kids.

Here’s one example:

I just recently used for image generation to design my balcony.

It was a great way to see design ideas imagined in place and decide what to do.

There are many cases people would hire an artist to illustrate an idea or early prototype. AI generated images make that something you can do by yourself or 10x faster than a few years ago.

Roughly, trying to keep it with minimal judgement, as hard as it is: - since 79 Iran is marking the US and Israel as enemy countries. (The US due to the 50s revolution, Israel because of the Palestinian problem?) - Iran has been developing nuclear weapons, and using dangerous rhetoric threatening those counties, form Iran perspective this is a defensive measure. - after recent happenings in the Middle East Iran directly attacked Israel (non direct attacks have been commonplace for a while now) making Israel stand to w 12 day war. - the conclusion of this war put both sides in an arms race. - finally, the Iranian protests ending in supposedly 30k dead citizens within about a week changed the perspective of western intelligence about the risk of Iran. A regime willing to kill so many of its citizens and building nuclear weapons is a problem hard to ignore.

Negotiations were clearly Stuck between the sides, forcing the obvious next stage.

This is simplified. But I think touches the core events.

I slightly corrected it not to trick op. But to clarify their position was naive. Sorry about that.

It still is naive no matter the quote though.

It’s also naive to dump down the conflict to being over oil. Oil is being used as leverage. But it is not the cause of it.

Quick reminder, the only humans to ever make it to the moon did it due to “barbaric tribes showing who’s better”.

It wasn’t bankrolled with billions for the good of society.

Being naive is fun, but being realistic about the species we are is better. And it seems we can leverage that to land on the moon. So it’s working as intended.

You also have to be quite stupid to do it with insider knowledge. A bunch of them have been caught in Israel.

Being indicted for treason and treason like charges sounds worse than the SEC coming after you.

The people who need the constant price do that, but creating this contract generates an investment at the same time. The person promising the price is taking a premium to take the risk, they can the sell that risk in a free market.

Meta did a bunch of mistakes, and look like Zuckerberg spent a lot of money on talent and made big swings to change it (that happened about a year ago)

I think it’s unrealistic to expect them to come back from that pit to the top in one year, but I wouldn’t rule them out getting there with more time. That’s a possible future. They have the money and Zuckerberg’s drive at the helm. It can go a long way.

And it’s perfectly okay to fix and improve the code later.

Many super talented developers I know will say “Make it work, then make it good”. I think it’s okay to do this on a bigger scale than just the commit cycle.

That chapter struck me as paranoia and hit piece.

What really happens there, if you ignore the author’s spin on it and concentrate on the facts is Sheryl is repeatedly asking her pregnant employee to please come stay in the big bed in the private jet and rest.

Then author has good points, such as Sheryl not taking into account she’s expecting ready deliverables. But she also spins it as if something sexual might happen there, or that Sheryl saying “you should have slept in the bed” in the end of the flight is a mafioso threat - and literally suggesting that Sheryl stopped trusting her because she didn’t take that offer.

(Worked at Meta for many years, not directly with Sheryl, and I am generally a fan of her, I think the book distorts at multiple times the messages she said)

I personally find that fighting dismissive attitudes is better done by not being dismissive towards other things (or people in this case)

It’s healthier for the discussion culture here as well.

Have you seen an agentic AI work its way through blockers? If it’s in the mood, it will find something not blocked that can do what it wanted.

All 1049 posts were peaceful? The pdf mentions this was mostly after October 7th, a terrorist (as in, meant to induce fear by targeting civilians) attack which was live streamed on Facebook and posted repeatedly during that day.

I’m surprised the Israelis are so capable with intelligence, yet bungled this so much that not one post they pointed out was violent?

I’m happy to stand corrected, but when someone shows a perfect record in a data review I’m naturally suspicious.

EDIT: I’m confusing the linked PDF and HRW’s report. But I still have doubts about HRW’s numbers.

My car hit the breaks for me last week on a highway. I’m quite happy with the computerization of cars for this reason. It could be better as the link shows the downsides, but it probably has saved (tens of?) thousands of lives overall.

Generally, all problems used for crypto are in NP. Since given the secret, you need to be able to compute it efficiently.

It’s just that being NP hard or complete is not enough.

The theoretical definition of one way functions is used to define cryptography. So reading on that my clarify this some more.

Ok, but then what is a way to do it?

The text gives an example to the core problem, and to argue differently requires thinking around it.

In practice. I’ve seen many attempts at measuring productivity, but once you dig into them, you see they are just abstraction mechanisms above something that is similar to lines of code.

I have yet to see an idea that sidesteps the core issue described in this post. Also, it applies to many types of work, and software is not unique in any way.