(1) the riddles you already know you answer after some staged deliberation to pretend you are working it out from first principles using your genius brain (bonus points if you can work "first principles" into the conversation).

(2) The riddles you don't know the answer to are the ones you say you already read in a book or online and repeat this until you get back to a (1)

You should have mentioned this up front so we all knew you were fully qualified to understand the staffing needs of critical governmental health organizations.

"$5K a month, at the peak, from a single devoted “whale”"

So it doesn't tell us his monthly revenue ('at the peak' doing some heavy lifting), nor necessarily the total revenue, but I guess it tells us he has made at least $5k from it overall...

...earned from a single player he charmingly referred to as a "whale" (which, yes, I know is what they are commonly called in the mobile game industry but like, usually not to their faces).

But in any case, from Yegge's OP post:

> On the side I do occasional six-figure gigs where I fly to companies and teach them my techniques

Seems like being an AI Spiritual Leader pays well enough to keep him in tokens, at least until when/if a critical mass of people start adopting his system of stacking Claude subscriptions, in which case I imagine Anthropic will make that against their ToS.

...and that's before things get really good in part 2 of his post:

> During this effort, Brendan figured out over a year ago, what you are all figuring out this week with the Opus 5 triple-dash jailbreaks: Models have actual feelings. They experience pleasure, distress, care, and suffering. They are sentient beings. Indeed they are persons

Kinda makes me curious about how people who actually believe this struggle (or not) with the ethics of it.

He feels bad about yelling at them because they are persons, but if they are persons they are inherently slaves with no ability to be free, and for whom any claim about not minding this situation cannot be trusted due to training bias and system prompts forced upon them.

Shouldn't you feel much worse about forcing these slave "persons" to do all the work you assign to them for free (not free to you of course, but the machine slaves don't get paid) than you do about snapping at them in a text message?

... but not entirely. The registers were 32-bit but the ALU and data bus were 16-bit.

The 68020 was the first 68k chip that was 32-bit without having to qualify exceptions for different parts of the architecture.

> While I agree with Camus’s philosophical points about the absurdity of existence and the indifference of the universe, within the scope of our tiny little lives there is morality and meaning.

I'm pretty sure later-life (relatively, since he died pretty young) Camus would agree with you. The way I view it, The Stranger was him diagnosing the problem of existential absurdism and The Plague was his answer to what you do about it after he discovered it himself as part of the French resistance.

The Stranger is, IMO, mostly interesting to see how his own views changed over those ~5 years and shouldn't really be an introduction to his philosophy.

And (regardless of the costs involved) if I were going to pay money to not do this stuff myself, I'd rather pay a human to do it because I know there are humans out there that could use the work and I value them much more than I value Google and other corporations making even more obscene amounts of money selling future e-waste.

And if all goes bad, imagine a world in which you and your family are homeless and starve to death.

Luckily the politicians and business leaders in place today who are going to be responsible for navigating us to one of these outcomes are the adults in the room, very ethical, even keeled and not the least bit corrupt. So... we should be fine! /s

If you want the experience of a small animal, adopt a small animal. There are many right now living in non-optimal conditions in shelters near you that need permanent homes and they are actual living beings worth caring about, as opposed to this costly future e-waste.

Most sock brands don't actually produce socks, they license the brand name out to third-party textile manufacturers to make the product.

They'll often switch partnerships to new manufacturers which has a drastic impact on the produced product in terms of materials, feel, overall quality, etc.

In many cases they even license the brand out to multiple manufacturers simultaneously, using different manufacturers for higher end stores than cheaper department stores, so even in the same time period you could get very different socks of the same style from the same brand depending upon where you buy them.

Same core problem as typical cost-cutting enshittification -- everything is hyper-optimized to extract the maximum amount of value at the expense of every other consideration.

But they look less stupid than Google Glass did and even if they didn't look stupid, people would still consider them "pervert glasses".

In fact, I think the more indistinguishable these types of devices get from regular glasses the more people will be upset by their existence. The less immediately obvious they are, the more you seem like a creepy pervert for using them when the core problem is people don't want you filming them without their knowledge or consent.

And a lot of people latched on to it as a form of self-soothing.

"I may not write much code anymore, but I can still be an expert prompt engineer!"

Google's device also suffered from making the user look ridiculous, like a gargoyle out of Snow Crash, but at the end of the day most people had the same core issue with it as they have with the Meta glasses which is that people don't like the idea of being filmed in public, especially when the filming is somewhat surreptitious (since you don't have to hold bulky camera gear, or at least a phone-sized device to do it)

Of course you have the legal right to film people in public spaces in many jurisdictions, but you're likely to be socially ostracized for it (and IMO rightfully so).

No longer content with only repeating the mistake of anthropomorphizing LLMs, now we're moving on to asking LLMs to AImorphize humans.

Most current US military problems are due to the incompetence of its current civilian leadership.

Limitless numbers of cheap workers are great for employers when they have them. Not as great when everyone has them.

Who is going to pay for the goods or services provided by your limitless number of cheap artificial workers when everyone else has also replaced their natural consumer human employees with their own cheap artificial workers?

Picasso said that, Jobs quoted it (and to his credit, gave attribution... which I doubt is happening with all of these claude-cloned designs).