testaccount28

with such a fat harness, this is more like watching a walk thru play the game.

yeah i mean i'm gonna chalk that one up to the nukes.

the optimizer controls the future. it doesn't kill humans directly, it just outcompetes them for all resources, including livable human environment.

climate change was never going to kill all humans.

4) Realizes the best path for it to not be detected is to create a distraction - like hacking into a random ai-related target that it could plausibly believe has the answer key to its task, creating a captivating but ultimately hollow news cycle.

> we'd have to prove that firing the gun caused the murder. how would we do this? we'd need to redo the murder many times, with and without my client firing his pistol. that's extremely expensive and not really feasible. therefore, we must acquit.

what is "the engagement algorithm"?

i'm sorry you're feeling upset about this.

this is also good! we can have both.

in the examples i can think of, this happens mostly because the company provides a product or service that is valuable to many, and shares the surplus with consumers. i am thinking about companies like microsoft, apple, netflix, google, stripe, walmart, costco, albertson's, starbucks, sysco.

what are the companies you are thinking about?

could you explain your perspective more?

i see it as: large companies are proof that much trade and consumption has occurred.

the sentinelese are sovereign, in my book. we could go do something which we call 'arresting them', i guess, but they would throw spears at us and chase us away, and then we would be at war.

i'm fine with people "living off the land", as long as they don't consume the services my taxes pay for.

colonization is obviously mandatory if we want more land. tax policy does not change that. nor does it make land more or less productive.

i do not support the use of force to seize assets. however, i believe that an overwhelming majority of people would -- upon reflection -- consciously and without duress agree to pay taxes in exchange for a working government.

maybe they vibed up some prompt injections. anyway, nice of them to tell on themselves.

see the font, close the tab

some candid feedback for claude:

    - the demo on the page makes no sound and is visibly off (triggers happen when the token is at the wrong location, or not at all)
    - the demo video is boring
    - it doesn't even _do the thing_? it's just a 1d piano roll in a circle? there's no fun petri net dynamics?

(who is upvoting this?)

you will spend much MUCH more time as a power law user than as a new user, such that almost any % gain in productivity once familiar is worth almost any months of unproductivity when new.

"Make a line of 10 apples and declare it to be 2 units long" <- what number does this physically realize?

> Why would countries have funds to help places like Haiti otherwise?

because that's what they think is best. what point are you trying to make? that countries don't pursue 'profit' at the expense of all other concerns?

in what way does drawing a diagram have anything to do with physically realizing a number?

> equality is undecidable

equality is always undecidable until you see the light of intuition. consider the rational number whose numerator is 0 if $theorem is true, and 1 if it is false, and whose denominator is 1.

"suppose that the minimum distance is one inch. well, that's one of something. so now imagine half of that! there you go: one half. a physically unrealizable number."

it reverses right and left click

2000 WPM @ 75%

the correct answer here is that they are all accountable. there is not some fixed quantity of blame to divvy up: each malfunctioning leg is responsible for the outcome.

what a bizarre non sequitur

lol "the extralegal spy agency has become as corrupt as the search engines!"

right. view it instead as "we need to keep domestic corn production above a certain threshold." the result is that we have a lot of extra corn. now the question becomes: what do we do with this extra corn? we can either throw it away, or turn it into fuel.

it's not an efficient course if the target is fuel, but that's not the target. it is a decent use if we have lots of corn that nobody wants, which we do.

op meant "in" not "into"

how could that crap possibly be organic

ah, the paper acknowledges this. my bad for jumping to the diagrams!