2,806 karma · joined June 11, 2009
On the other hand, I buy way more movies than I used to, because upload sites have exposed me to many good films that I would never have heard of otherwise.
To leverage incongruity, a funny punchline for "Why did the sun climb the tree?" would rely on an unexpected interpretation of the question or a double meaning in the answer.
The argument against piracy is that people have the right to be compensated for their work. Consider this argument in the context of medical services. The extreme pirate position is equivalent to expecting doctors to provide cosmetic surgery for free. The extreme industry position is equivalent to saying doctors should let patients die on the sidewalk if they can't pay.
I'm torn on the issue of sharing files, because I've watched its rise over the past 25 years and seen how tremendously it has improved educational opportunities for poorer peoples.
This dissociation has been used to test theories of hemispheric specialization. A good overview is in Neurolinguistic Aspects of the Japanese Writing System by Michel Piradis (1985).
It would be good to hear from an immigration expert on what can be done to avoid this kind of screw up.
Cynically, there are plenty of people who don't care so long as they can get it published.
Pragmatically, the quality of work is frequently so poor, leading to so much random variation in results, I doubt that frequent errors in AI-produced work would significantly change the quality range in many fields.
When the internet was yet fairly new, I was assigned to teach basic computer use to a class of Saudi Arabian soldiers. Many of these guys were fresh out of the desert, some even still adjusting to the idea of wearing shoes. They had no idea what to do when placed in front of a computer. Imagine if your dog got up on its hind legs, rested its paws on the keyboard, and poked its nose at the screen. To cut the story short, I led them through this and that and by the end of a month, they certainly couldn't touch-type, but they were designing their own web pages. They were so enthusiastic that they were sneaking into the lab after hours (evidently to search online for pics of naked ladies).
My point is that computer interfaces are designed to be simple and intuitive, so you don't need an early start to practice like you do with a highly complex task like playing a musical instrument. There is really no developmental benefit to early screen use.
It does sound like there is a specific design issue to be discussed.
When reading long, closely reasoned passages of medieval philosophy, I've wondered about their development process, when there was no such thing as scratch paper.
> Kids that grow up with LLMs will just think differently.
People are just glibly saying this sort of thing, but what specifically is coming? I'm now wrestling with the problem of dealing with university students who don't hesitate to lean on LLMs. I'm trying to not be dismissive, but it feels like they are just thinking less, not differently.
The books generally provided lists of observed patterns, usually at least a half dozen but sometimes a few times that. My takeaway from that reading was three general principles.
1. Location: The kind of events that you would consider relevant luck are not evenly distributed geographically. You need to be where they happen more often.
2. Preparation: At those locations, there will probably be multiple candidates waiting to take advantage of an opportunity. You need to aim to be the best candidate.
3. Flexibility: Your expectations for desirable opportunities have been molded by your limited knowledge of the world. You need to be ready to pursue opportunities that weren't exactly what you had in mind but may turn out to be just as satisfying.
TFA is hard to comment on because it feels like a rough draft. The reasoning could be sharpened. I have reservations about the "air your weirdness", because it seems to contradict the principle of flexibility.
There is some discussion of LLMs and models in another thread. (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44625629)
The explanation for the difference is that automated discrimination has relied mainly on structural factors such as average sentence/paragraph length and frequency of stock words/phrases and certain parts of speech. Human evaluators look at content factors such as repetition of ideas, less precise wording, generalizations rather than concrete examples, overall conceptual coherence, and factual errors.
Cyberpunk predicted this, but I don't think anyone predicted how we now see people relinquishing their thinking to LLMs.
> Babies flick paper magazines to scroll
I know a young couple who are rigorously keeping screen devices away from their toddler, yet the kid has picked up the habit of holding up random objects to his ear and talking to it, or just swiping across the object's surface.