But there’s a lot of panicking, fear-mongering and all sorts of nonsense around this whole subject.

But it doesn't only look sloppy or hastily made, it also looks inaccurate - and that really makes a bad impression. "Inaccurate" or "careless" are not the words any author should want their reader to think about.

A screenshot from an emulator, showing the same message but formatted as a BASIC program (just a bunch of PRINTs or REMs) - or something similarly simple to make, lacking glaring inauthenticity - would make a drastically better impression.

Last time I checked (about half an year ago) it was hardcoded and unconditional, so disabling it required a patch.

But it’s the only radio-based mesh network I’ve ever “seen” anyone else on.

Duolingo it got me just enough Spanish (with zero prior knowledge) to get around, communicate basic needs (like a caveman, sure) and understand simple instructions, all without putting serious effort to learn language properly (putting serious effort into it) but only casually, as a side task.

Your coins frozen with no reason given even internally except for "machine said no" - no one gets any slap on the wrist unless you sue real hard, happen to win, and most likely that'll be just a scratch that won't be noticed enough to change any attitudes.

The Man sees that someone they don't like transferring their coins through the fintech company - that's what those companies are really concerned about, because it would be a punch in the gut the company will feel.

Thus, the incentives. Current social design doesn't punish for false positives (until they hit really high levels), only false negatives.

But the few years to come are going to be wild for a lot of folks out there.

I don't expect Coinbase to publish a "we're hiring everyone back" in 5 years from now, but I hope at some point media will spot those trends as they'll - I have no doubts - will happen, and propagate that tune.

Because their goal metric is number of tasks closed/features delivered (and this counts as one), not customers satisfied.

Plus, social parroting - a misconception that if it's popular and everyone does it it "can't be wrong".

And overhauling the language to match scientific understanding requires getting everyone onboard with that scientific understanding. Good luck with that, given that we have plenty of people who believe in weirdest nonsense.

Brain is not the only thing that makes us conscious, the whole human is a super-weird collection of highly intertwined systems that work together and produce whatever we call “human.” As I get it, it’s a huge complexity all the way down to that gut bacteria that somehow affects our thinking too. And I don’t think we have a vocabulary for all that - we mostly think of “self” as a single entity.

LLMs “live” in token “space”, and it’s “aware” of all its surroundings in form of input. (Quoted terms for my lack of better words.) It has no other surroundings to be directly (not intellectually) aware of, just like we aren’t immediately aware about the physics around us.

As for the static nature - LLMs are trained and aren’t exactly static, they just get updates at different cadences, and we call those updates different names or, more precisely, versions. Plus LLMs can exist in multiple versions simultaneously - we can’t “fork” a human mind but it’s simple with LLM. Claude Opus (not sure if e.g. Haiku is related or parallel development with distinct origins) is like the proverbial Ship of Theseus in this sense. Either way it’s undeniable it learns and evolves, just very differently from biological systems, and ot all depends on how we decide to call things. Which isn’t exactly surprising, given it’s based on different principles and processes.

Actually it pulls latest versions (checking registry then installing that exact version, not sure why they sidestep normal resolution algorithms) no matter what .npmrc may say, so min-release-age breaks almost everywhere it integrates with JS/TS ecosystem (most visibly, Copilot). I probably should’ve filed an issue.

It also installs Go packages but I haven’t looked into that.

And that's a very important distinction when it comes to maintaining complex systems. This could've changed with LLMs (I'm still adjusting to what new capabilities mean for various decision-making logic), but before machine intelligence debugging an issue with Kubernetes could've been a whole world of pain.

It's not that story, though. It's a story "oops, my tool ran DROP TABLE on the production database" (blaming the tool). At least I haven't heard people blaming their terminals or database clients as if the tool is somehow responsible for it.

We’d all wish it’d be so, doctor. Sometimes it’s as clean as biological systems - touch something somewhere, a different seemingly completely unrelated thing elsewhere breaks.

Even in the dawn of the era, where accumulated complexity was a while lot lower, we have tales of 500-mile emails and “magic/more magic” switch ;-)

Inferring things in a legacy codebase old enough to drink can be quite a challenge. And the way I get it, you folks are dealing with a multimillenia-old mess of layering violations - so no surprise first principles are tricky.