Viewing profile — par1970

qed

edit: racism is bad

That’s fucking sick.

> AI (in this form) will never be able to solve things we truly cannot solve yet. Argument?

> LLMs are nothing close to AGI and not going to lead to it, they can’t distinguish right from wrong, they can’t count, they can’t reason, they generate plausible text from a vast …

Which doomer argument have you found what problem with?

Do you deny the reported bug finding capabilities, or do you deny that they are dangerous?

I think this is roughly solved. Tell the agent to do all of its calculations in python.

Do you have a defense of why human-hammer-nail is a good analogy for human-chatgpt5.4-pwndsamsung?

But the service also tells criminals and adversaries about the bomb locations.

Yeah, maybe you are right. But is doing math and reasoning about Turing machines a priori? If so, then it seems plausible to me that reasoning about a codebase (without running it)…

> What do you mean "a priori understanding codebases"? I took him to be distinguishing between (1) just reading the code/docs and reasoning about it, and (2) that + crafting and ru…

Why?

Did you tell it that it should test, or did you have it generate actual tests that you could run if you wanted to?

How much domain experience do you have? Is it helping you solve problems for paying customers?

If your project requires the solution of a tricky algorithmic issue, then is the AI system able to solve that part, or do you have to give it the solution?

What models + versions are you using? Is it bad at designing systems that don't have a bunch of integrations?

> I don't use ChatGPT, but i've been using an agent with Claude Sonnet 4. Are you using Sonnet 4.6? > So this AI Agent... It is much faster at doing code when given specific instru…

Which models + versions are you using? Can you give a specific problem that you found them to be bad at?

I've been programming for 10+ years. From my usage of ChatGPT 5.4, it seems to me that it's better than me at programming. I never thought this about any of the ChatGPT 4.* models …

Maybe we are talking past one another. > Right, but that's explicitly not the body of government meant to represent people. I haven't claimed that the Senate was intended to repres…

I think OP is arguing that because they literally said "The Senate is fundamentally a ridiculous way of representing 350 million people and we’re going to continue to get absurd un…

Are you arguing this? (Premise 1) If a country has 350 million people, then the Senate will produce unrepresentative outcomes. (Premise 2) America has 350 million people. (Conclusi…

> We're nowhere close to AGI and don't have a clue how to get there. Do you have an argument?

So do we already do this? And if not, why not?