My boomer parents and their friends are all staring to their phones wa-a-ay more often than I’d consider healthy. At least as much as my millenial/xennial friends.

Social media and attention stealing algos are addictive and unhealthy, regardless of the age group. If anything I’d say that gen-x is uniquely positioned - old enough to have experienced the world without the internet, young enough to see the consequences of it.

It sounds weird, but try writing your problem in LaTeX - I don’t know why, I’ve found a couple models to be incredibly capable at solving mathematical problems if you write them in LaTeX.

Beyond practical repairability and sustainability, I appreciate the possibility of swapping out a mainboard for another with a completely different arch

[0] https://frame.work/products/deep-computing-risc-v-mainboard

[1] https://store.deepcomputing.io/products/dc-roma-risc-v-mainb...

I kind of expect that from someone heading a company that appears to have sold-the-farm in an AI gamble. It’s interesting to see a similar viewpoint here (all biases considered)

Which ones, specifically? I’m genuinely curious. The ones about “[an] unfalsifiable disease-free utopia”? The one from a labor economist basically equating Amodei’s high-unemployment/strong economy claims to pure fantasy? The fact that nothing Amodei said was cited or is substantiated in any meaningful way? Maybe the one where she points out that Amodei is fundamentally a sales guy, and that Anthropic is making the rounds saying scary stuff just after they released a new model - a techbro marketing push?

I like anthropic. They make a great product. Shame about their CEO - just another techbro pumping his scheme.

The name might seem a little sketchy, but it’s a legit service. I don’t know about “free” - I’ve always ended up paying to file at least one of state or federal, I don’t recall, but not pricy.

(Edit - looking closer, I’ve been using them since 2007. Wow, time flies. Great service, no complaints.)

> … the woman first visited doctors with tremors and trouble balancing. As is often the case, once symptoms started, her condition rapidly worsened. She was hospitalized … and several days into her stay, she fell into a coma that she would never awaken from.

In other news, apparently hgh used to be extracted from cadavers. Wtlf.

My understanding is that context sensitive grammars _can_ allow for recursive structures that are beyond cfgs, which is precisely why they sit below csgs in terms of computational complexity.

I don’t agree or disagree that LLMs might be, or are, capable of parsing (i.e., perception in Chomsky’s terms, or, arguably, “understanding” in any sense). But that they can learn the grammar of a “complex cfg” isn’t a convincing argument for the reasons you indicate.

That just strikes me as an odd thing to say. I’m convinced that this is the dividing line between today’s software engineers and tomorrow’s AI engineers (in whatever form that takes - prompt, vibe, etc.) Reed’s statement feels very much like a justification of “if it compiles, ship it!”

> “It would be crazy if in an auto factory people were measuring to make sure every angle is correct,” he said, since machines now do the work. “It’s not as important as when it was group of ten people pounding out the metal.”

Except that the machines doing that work aren’t regularly hallucinating angles, spurious welding joints, etc.

https://techrights.org/n/2023/12/14/_Video_Lessons_to_be_Lea...

https://blog.cogitactive.com/website/gandi-outrageous-price/

It’s cheaper to move from one model to another than it is to train a general purpose model yourself (to say nothing of domain-specific smaller models or anything open source.)

I’m not sure about problems turning into black boxes, LLMs are pretty explicit in my experience when producing a solution (good or bad.) _How_ they came about that solution _is_ a black box, but that’s not a new problem.

https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/llm-temperature

Word. I’m not a huge Microsoft fan, but it feels like they’re just shoving ChatGPT/copilot down your throat every chance they get. It’s integrated into everything - it’s useful when it’s useful, okay, but it generally isn’t. It’s one more Microsoft’ism that you have to learn to tolerate or simply ignore.

I can’t tell if Nadella’s really betting the farm on it all, or if he’s just trying to leave his mark.

https://store.deepcomputing.io/products/dc-roma-ai-pc-risc-v...

I especially like the idea of getting a framework version in this case I want to swap in a different mainboard. By their own admission, the risc-v board is targeting developers and not ready for prime time. Also coming from the US, not sure how the tariff thing will workout…

By virtually every definition I can find, a monopoly is a an entity that functions as the sole, or effectively the primary, provider of a good or service in some market. That seems to perfectly describe Google’s position wrt web-based advertising. Do other ad-platforms exist? Absolutely. Do they exhibit the kind of market dominance or control that Google does? Nowhere close.

> Google has no power to stop them.

Fact? I’d argue that Google’s sheer size and dominance means they don’t need to stop them. Potential competitors simply don’t stand a chance given Google’s size, number of resources, and reach. Explain how that’s not a significant factor into Google “power to stop” a potential rival?