AI 'writing' makes me ill, but that's happening because I can 'feel' the prose's samey hollowness in every paragraph.

But! If someone is just moving word by word and is focussed on just the gist (the average reading level is '6th grade' here in the states), then it will not repel them the way it does us. Also, AI's grammar is impeccable, if bizarre, and the word choices can be facially erudite, so that might also be mistaken as a signal for competence where none exists.

https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/...

You have stated an unfortunate fact while hiding your value judgement. Do you think the laws you reference are correct, or no?

Do you understand the difference between having a responsibility to prevent your child from law-breaking and having absolute control over their life in general?

If you have children, or plan to, do you want to control every action they take to protect yourself from hypothetical legal consequence? Do you think you have the right to do so? Do you think you should be able to control what they think and express as well?

These questions are not hypothetical, as an answer in the affirmative is precisely what creates the type of abuse I described above.

"my parents are/were abusive" is something a plurality of people (and especially those raised in evangelical churches) experience.

Within that dynamic, the 'value' at issue here is 'Do I, your child, have a right to my own body and choices?'; Too often, the reply to that is 'no, we expect obedience and obeisance to God, your father, and your mother, in that exact order, because that is the one true way'.

This is a form of domination, not well-meaning 'protection'. It does, in fact, 'mess people up', in their intimate relationships most of all.

Even Immoral and Amoral companies serve values that others might consider 'baggage'.

Palantir worshipping death and war has caused their civilian contracts to suffer and languish. This is baggage; It may be their own death knell.

'(amorally) maximizing shareholder value (for the next quarter)' is (for me) an insane value system on its face, and makes problems for everyone around them, yet who argue like you are here don't see that as 'personal baggage' at all.

You have defined success (for a project, and possibly a person too) as solely 'relevance'.

Jarred would agree with you wholeheartedly, I imagine. Andrew would ask you to leave.

It's okay to have different values and part ways.

It's not wise, however, to project your personal values onto other people, and judge them on those fabricated merits. You'll end up frustrated and confused more often than not.

Judge their choice of values. Judge them on their alignment with their chosen values.

As an example, Andrew doesn't like Jarred's chosen 'Silicon Valley' values, but thinks that Jarred aligns himself well with those values. This feels as a personal attack to you who also holds those values. And on some level, a person intimating you core values suck couldn't be more personal.

I'm not snarking, this is a problem affecting 30% or more of the population here in the states, and it's getting worse because of tools like AI. I'm not judging you, I don't think you are bad or deficient people, but this externalsing of comprehension and trust is self-harm.

Worse, it will lead you astray in ways that you won't tie back to this core problem.

To use an LLM safely you must have the discernment to understand when it has fallen into sycophancy, folly, or madness.

"Jarred, in his professional capacity, drove away many from our community, and we'd prefer to disassociate." is not 'Jarred is a bad person, privately'.

Now, in these circles, that might as well be the same thing, given how little personal life I imagine most VCs have left outside of work. But that's not really Andrew's problem.

I won't defend Andrew's style; I think he could mask some his neurodivergence more when communicating to a wider neurotypical audience. But it's his project, his community is certainly aware, and this too, is a known quantity.

It might help you though, to reread the piece with the assumption that Andrew is being completely sincere, without adding in a secondary subtext like, "Andrew is trying to assassinate Jarred's character".

May the low-waged ever be trodden upon and forever know their true place.

Those that died or became disabled during covid are mewling degenerates.

Their cries of 'illness', 'poverty', and 'homelessness' are precisely as useless as the wailing and lamentation of women in their menses, a farcical thing to be dismissed and ignored.

May the Fed be ever in your favor, Amen

Which of those do you most prefer?

Would you also like an ethnic caste system, or should it be based solely on national origin, or a combination?

Or perhaps the original European model, where only non-christians may be enslaved?

* I want you to go and tell another human being, in person, that paper menus cannot possibly 'scale'. Your brain has been deeply addled by SV culture.

* HUMAN TIME IS THE POINT AT A SIT DOWN PLACE, WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?

* YOU HAVE YOUR HUMAN EYES FOR 'SEARCH'

* QR CODE SCANNING IS NOT "GETTING BETTER" WHAT DO YOU EVEN MEAN BY THIS ASSERTION??

* OLDER PEOPLE AND PEOPLE WITHOUT SMARTPHONES WILL NOT "GET USED TO IT"

* "if demand is there" IT IS, HOW CAN YOU ACT LIKE IT IS NOT, DO YOU NOT HAVE DINNER WITH FRIENDS?? ARE YOU NEW TO THIS PLANET?

    An automated system is on 24/7 -- maybe not in the early days, technology isn't perfect, but how many people here remember the early days of cell phones, when you *called support to get refunds for dropped calls*?

    An automated system can add or remove people from the authorized list easily and remotely, and not make mistakes.

Meanwhile at that table, 68 people are sharing 3 meals between themselves.

Would you want to eat at that table? Are you even a member of that class or are you just wish-casting?

LLMs are intentionally not deterministic, nor is their output subject to any known specification. Output is a point in a high dimensional manifold, determined by the input vector, but this manifold is unknowable in a real and intractable sense.

These are not equivalent constructions and it demeans you to conflate them.

We have to settle for 'crumbs'?

Why would you say this like it is true?

And tallow, by itself, is not something you eat, it's just moving the point of thermal and chemical alteration and production into your home.

Finally, most of this "eat as much animal offal as possible" movement is directly funded by the producers of these products battling it out with the producers of competing products.

You should listen to your doctors over influencers that talk about chemistry in a way that makes simple things sound dangerous and evil.

First, pedantically, we did not share time with 'dinosaurs' in the sense you imply.

Secondly, pedantically, that kind of hunting was not the main source of calories for hunter-gatherers. It's more apt to imagine them as gatherers first and primarily.

Thirdly, and also pedantically, you are not describing the system of capitalism that I, and most educated people talk about when they use the word. That system has only been with us in the main for, generously, 250 years.

Critically, Thag and Grog both own the means of production for their spears and 'steaks' respectively. The necessary abstractions for capital accumulation, debt, and private ownership simply do not exist.