wan23

AI can plan and do architectural work - just not amazingly well. Treat it as an intern or a new grad at best. Though this capability has been increasing pretty rapidly, so who knows where we'll be in a few years.

I'm not making an argument, you are. You suggested that the long history going back to 1906 makes these actions normal. I'm merely pointing out that what they were doing back then was immoral, which may undermine your argument inasmuch as things that are immoral are not normal to expect from our government.

From your link:

Causes for denaturalization under the 1906 Act included fraud, racial ineligibility and lack of “good moral character.” In 1907, Congress expanded the laws on loss of citizenship by marking for expatriation all U.S.-born citizens who had naturalized in foreign nations and women who had married foreigners.

I'm not sure we should want to go back and dredge up the shadiest old laws for application today.

At some point when the compounding was ramping up it was difficult to get the drugs even with a prescription and being willing to pay the full no-insurance price. Nowadays you can mostly get it, but insurance coverage is spotty. Because of weird incentives, the no-insurance prices of drugs are highly inflated so the amount that they cost isn't a realistic price for most people to afford. The manufacturers offer coupons but the conditions on them, and the fact that they still leave you with a pretty inflated price tag means that the compounded versions like what HIMS sell are the most cost effective option for a lot of people - it's still highly marked up, but to a level that is manageable for way more people.

Alternatively, an intelligence agency might publish what they want you to think they know, or simply what they want you to think.

The fifth amendment gives you the right to be silent, but they didn't write in anything about biometrics.

Is it good or bad when companies research their own products and release the results honestly?

A challenge: can you write down a definition of thinking that supports this claim? And then, how is that definition different from what someone who wasn't explicitly trying to exclude LLM-based AI might give?

You don't have to believe that LLMs are conscious to observe that you get different results to a question like "Is it okay to steal candy from a baby if you really want it" if you precede that question by "Answer as a highly moral actor" or "Answer as a supervillain". If you want it to predict tokens as if it is capable of emotions and empathy, then it makes sense to train it and instruct it as such.

I like that store but it's not exactly convenient. I'm a New Yorker - my apartment is small and I've never had a driver's license in my life. I need to buy small amounts of food frequently rather than load up, so going to a place that has kind of middling versions of everything isn't super useful compared to places that have smaller selections of good things. I spend a lot of time at Trader Joe's for example, though I buy bread from a bakery, tea from a tea shop, meat and cheese from a specialty shop, etc.

Liberal still means liberal, and still means all the things you said. Without getting into the merits of any particular side, IMO we have a categorization problem. People use the word liberal for all types of left ideologies, which is a mistake as it makes it hard to pin down what people actually believe. Also the concepts of left and far left (and right and far right) are overused. The combination of these two phenomena make it so that people will say that things leftists do are "more liberal" when they are in fact not liberal at all.

Obama deported more people than Bush or Clinton, but chose to deprioritize (defer action) on the most sympathetic and focused more on troublemakers. Some might call that pragmatic use of limited resources.

Attention is not a moat, it's the thing that's in the castle's treasure room. Without something that makes your service sticky attention may well just walk right out the door.

Given the choice, end users choose free or cheap and ad supported over full price in huge majorities. You have to weigh "I don't like ads" against 200 million (!) people on Netflix's ad supported plan and how much enjoyment they get that they might not otherwise. Not to mention things like Google that are ad supported and genuinely useful. In the real world things have pros and cons.

That's not how it works - in the case of impeachment the Senate holds a trial, and they are allowed to use their own definitions of treason, bribery, etc. The Supreme Court is in charge of what the regular courts do and can make rulings that bind them, but they can't bind Congress in the same way. After all, the justices of the supreme court are also subject to the impeachment process like the President is and it'd be weird if they could make rules about how that works.

Funny you should say that after today's FDA announcement. (Not taking any side here just interested in how we determine what is a consensus these days)

What's your definition of sketchy? For me I'd say by definition a non-sketchy brand is one that has some kind of social proof. The next question though is who do you trust?

One thing that's tricky about analog clocks if you're not used to them - the hour hand sweeps unnecessarily over the course of an hour so you have to find the hour hand then go backwards. We have the technology to make clocks where the hour hand actually points to the hour that it is. I don't understand why the jump hour feature isn't more common.

This is part of the learning curve. When you vibe code you produce something that is as if someone else wrote it. It’s important to learn when that’s appropriate versus using it in a more limited way or not at all.

A different way to look at it is language models do know things, but the contents of their own knowledge is not one of those things.

Do you think each person is responsible for enforcing federal laws? Like if you personally are not spending your own time and money to round up those in violation of federal statute then you're doing something wrong?

And if not, is it true of your neighborhood? Of your town? What level of grouping of people is big enough that they are required to help Washington with whatever thing they have asked for? Keeping in mind that our constitutional system is designed around a federal government that is supposed to be responsive to the desires of the people from the various states, not the other way around.

Maybe think about it narrowed down to an individual level - maybe you installed a camera or two around your property for whatever useful reasons like monitoring your children, and then later you find out that you are required to share all of your footage with some other entity (e.g. the police) in a way you did not sign up for. Would you choose to release your footage, or would you take the cameras down?

I'm wearing a ~$4000 MR-G today and I'm really happy with my choice. IMO the best thing about Casio as a brand is that they sell $15 watches and $8000 watches that do basically do the same things but appeal to different people. The existence of the higher end models doesn't diminish the utility or value of the classics. There's really something for everyone.

Ideally, the government wouldn't be doing anything that requires tracking like this. We got by for hundreds of years without it.

Photons reflected off of objects are not the actual objects. I wouldn't go so far as to say that sensing these is a particularly special way to know about things compared to hearing or reading about them. Further, many humans do not sense photons yet seem to manage to have perfectly fine working world models.

Generous is a strange choice of word - it's like implying the government is entitled to its own citizens' money, and we should consider ourselves lucky that they weren't taking as much of it.

Grey markets aren't the same black markets. Ideally the government would be omniscient, efficient, and benevolent so that it could properly regulate things to the benefit of the masses, but in practice it government isn't very responsive and in many cases has to consider different viewpoints on an issue. Even worse, regulations usually create winners and losers in a way where even if it's beneficial to change the regulation, whoever would lose out will automatically be opposed to the change. Americans - mostly working and middle class, not wealthy - bought 50+ billions of dollars of goods imported this way last year. The American people have voted with their wallets but the government is not responsive to their desires in this case.

Pedestrians always have the right of way on city streets. Jaywalking is just walking.

I use it to do all the things that I couldn't be bothered to do before. Generate documentation, dump and transform data for one off analyses, write comprehensive tests, create reports. I don't use it for writing real production code unless the task is very constrained with good test coverage, and when I do it's usually to fix small but tedious bugs that were never going to get prioritized otherwise.

I can't imagine anything much less newsworthy than a hiring freeze during a reorg