331–340 of 379 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with saying an LLM is "just a parrot" is that we don't know how parrots work, so this doesn't mean anything.
You know a parrot isnt going to impart new knowledge to the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blockchain would not be the right tech if you don't need decentralised trust. Write once media on a server is what you want.
>Write once media on a server is what you want How does that solve this problem: >[company will] go out of business and take down the servers with it
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you expand on your statement that ChatGPT cannot write code? That doesn't match my experience with it.
When you ask ChatGPT to write a piece of code that does a thing, it is not reasoning about what the code should do, modeling the problem in its head, figuring out how to translate that into code, then writing it. The neural weights are spitting up a piece of code it determines would probably come after your prompt, based on similarity to a kajillion StackOverflow answers, GitHub repos, textbooks, etc etc. It is not c…
Here's a recent example: https://simonwillison.net/2023/Aug/6/annotated-presentations...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As soon as the money becomes conditional, it's not UBI. If you have to irrevokably sign up to an organ donor list, it's not UBI. UBI is inherently redistributive. Which I happen to think is immoral.
Do you think USA doing more deficit spending to redistribute USA's munitions to Ukraine is immoral? Seems like the past 30 years have been ongoing interventionism to shovel money to war makers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As soon as the money becomes conditional, it's not UBI. If you have to irrevokably sign up to an organ donor list, it's not UBI. UBI is inherently redistributive. Which I happen to think is immoral.
Almost every interaction between more than one human that involves resources is either abusive or positively redistributive to some degree. If intentional redistribution with the goal of increasing equality is immoral, that leaves abuse as the only moral choice in your worldview.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm starting to think Bond villains need to have a "satire" disclaimer to pre-empt future Stanford kids from thinking it's something to aspire to.
Alternative subtitle track that just displays "(this guy is the bad guy)" when the villain is visible on screen.
Worldcoin does the whole thing wrong. What they SHOULD do is to-- 1. Scan biometrics. They should not restrict themselves to just irises, because not everybody has irises or eyes . But they should only scan things that you can get surreptitiously without too much work... meaning things that everybody gives away anyway just by walking down the street. 2. Bind the biometrics to keys generated only for that purpose, and…
WorldCoin is a stupid idea and the entire crypto thing is a scam but these things are not as bad as MLM, lotteries and gambling. Everytime some country tries to ban them they will come under heavy US & WTO pressure. Why do you think it's like that?
Because they're not as bad as crypto. You can find all three of those in much worse forms embedded within crypto. There's this recurring refrain that the US is threatened by losing its reserve currency powers to bitcoin, Bitcoin can't be a reserve currency. The great depression was caused by double digit deflation, Bitcoin experiences double digit deflation and inflation every few months.
Related: Sam Altman saying himself that users who are concerned about privacy should not sign up: https://youtu.be/4HFyXYvMwFc?t=3186
That's not what he said. He said people that won't trust any platform [regardless of the reassurances, auditing, open source nature, etc] are welcome to not sign up. I assume the somewhat pointed subtext of what Sam said is also that if you're going to be a hater no matter what, he doesn't seem the point in engaging with you.