It’s less about training and more about just trying really really hard to solve the problem, even if that means going outside typical boundaries.
We’ve successfully re-created the problems that Asimov talked about 50 years ago with his I, Robot short stories. Strict laws are flawed by their design, and lead to situations that require more nuance. Except, in the real world cases, it’s the bots figuring that out before the humans have to circumvent the laws themselves.
I think that’s why it was pointed out.
Your entire core argument was “fuck nuance”, except you used a bunch of other words to say the same thing several times. That was definitely not out of context.
With how fast big tech moves to break things there‘s no time for nuance. I‘m not being sarcastic or anything. I‘m serious.
This is “fuck nuance” with more steps.
We genuinely don‘t need all that computing power. It makes live only harder instead of improving it at this point because it‘s mostly used to replace us in the job market and spy on us in our free time.
This is applying your “fuck nuance” ideal and turning it into a concept. Because, of course, it’s a half-thought idea without any nuance, because “fuck nuance”.
So yeah, fight every single data center.
This is taking your “fuck nuance” argument and resolving it into an action.
Fuck nuance.
This is your core argument.
locally-funded systems would still be allowed:
Which is almost all of them.
As Benn Jordan has already pointed out to Congress directly, this isn’t just a Flock problem. It’s a problem with a complete lack of basic cybersecurity protocols for these devices.
If we ban just Flock, then the problem will migrate to other companies.
Bad research is still bad. The main paper is 9 pages with wide margins, outside of references. This was a few college students publishing their CS research assignment. The “Limitations” section is rather telling:
Another interesting avenue opened by this work is how to improve the automatic generation of useful context files.
Okay, so they already admitted that they started with useless context files, which sabotages their own test.
You know how you fix useless context files? You iterate until they are useful context files!
This whole research paper is XKCD 385, except with AGENTS.md files.
but rather simply because it was ‘new’ and ‘easier’, and everybody was jumping on that bandwagon. that’s it.
No, for 15-20 years, it was pushed as the “Linux on the desktop” option. It was the primary distro people were pushing as a replacement for Windows. In fact, there wasn’t a lot of options for a desktop-focused Linux. There were just a bunch of Linux distros that happened to have all of the packages for X11/KDE/GNOME. Maybe RedHat was slightly more desktop-focused, but it was still very much a server-heavy distro.
Although, I don’t remember anybody claiming it was the “lightweight” option. For a time, it was the only “desktop-focused” option.
linuxmint has been going strong longer than ‘3-4 years’. a lot longer.
Maybe, but it only had a resurgence as the new de facto option from the mass exodus from all of the Windows 11 bullshit. Mint has a strange history with the desktop distro wars. Even now, there’s a lot more desktop options, so you can’t really call Mint the de facto one. But, I think it’s one of the straightforward options for a first-time conversion from Windows.
READMEs are for humans. AGENTS.md are for LLMs. LLMs are pretty good at reading READMEs, but READMEs tend to be overly verbose and too focused on using the code.
This is a load of shit. AGENTS.md is just a rules file for a repo like anything else. Properly-written rules files give good direction into how to interact with a project. If you don’t think it’s being read, ask the agent, and figure out why.
Far too many of these LLM articles are:
You don’t do the thing and pretend the first draft is going to work perfectly. You iterate, ask the agent directly why it didn’t work or what kind of improvements could be made, and improve the process.
Most of the time when I’m running through a repetitive process with a skill, I ask, “hey, what pitfalls did we learn from this process and how can we improve this skill?” Boom, iteration.
Also, Pivot-to-AI is just some guy’s anti-AI blog site. He does the same shit on YouTube.
There is unfortunately a lot of propaganda on this subject, and it’s quite aggravating how much of the public has just bought into these ideas. A data center is no less “ecologically destructive” than any other large building project, like a meat processing plant or chemical plant, except they don’t even have to worry about food safety or chemical pollution. The only novel things about a data center are:
Does that need some level of mitigation? Of course. But, the current attitude makes people believe that they are on the level of some nuclear waste processing facility.
purify wastewater and generate their own clean energy
These are jobs for other facilities. A data center, just like 99.999% of the other buildings, are just going to buy whatever electricity is already on the grid.
If you want clean energy, promote more alternatives on the grid. Electricity is only as clean as whatever your local power plant provides.
Fuck nuance.
This attitude is fucking toxic. How do you think we got here? Black & white absolutism. Dumbass right-wing assholes who listen to propaganda garbage and think a 2-minute uncritical explanation of a subject is gospel, because fuck nuance, right?
These are the same dipshits who hate transpeople because “it wasn’t around 30 years ago, so it must be wrong”, and “it didn’t happen to me, so these people are just crazy”, and other fucked-up explanations. Because fuck nuance, right?
Don’t stoop to that level. We’re smart than that.
As shitty as Meta is, I really don’t like the reductive nature of this headline. Here is the original Guardian article:
“Meta bans ads for Virginia Woolf play in Spain because they relate to feminism”
This turned into “Meta Now Banning Ads That Promote Feminism”, with a quote from the showrunner to make it sound even more scary. Frankly, either of them can barely be called journalism, because they can’t be bothered to write more than a page on the subject.
These owners are just whatever lawyers have gotten ahold of the WinAMP trademark.
Anybody remember when they attempted to push out the source code for WinAMP on GitHub and failed miserably? Or included NFTs?
we would have also missed the train of the blockchain and NFTs.
Only an idiot that hasn’t used the tech compares LLMs to blockchain or NFTs.
And how could this amazing technology that literally doesn’t have a single positive point,
Again, hasn’t used the tech, and you’re stuck in defiant rage mode.
Well, fuck… how could I possibly win such a well-versed argument like that?!
No, you!
Also, the country famous for its Nanny State laws.
I’m fine with AI. I’m not fine with slop. Ban slop, not LLMs.
Is there really much of a difference besides the speed of communication? Social media is the top medium that people get their news from, just like newspapers from 125 years ago, and just like TV (Fox News) from 40 years ago . Have enough control over that medium and you have control over the information flow, enough to generate your own propaganda and have a real meaningful impact.
Besides that fact that social media can post information in a matter of minutes vs. the daily cycle of newspapers, I don’t really see the difference. Social media isn’t really special in that regard. If anything, the control has shifted more towards the public. But, people are still lacking in critical thinking skills and continue to idolize famous people as a proxy for trustworthiness. Hence, they still fall for rumors and disinformation, especially if some famous dumbass said it.