Challenge accepted: https://codepen.io/editor/mkantor/pen/019eb65b-5b17-70cc-872...

You aren't entirely wrong, but I think I'd change "almost always" to "often" or even "sometimes". A lot of the specifics come down to how you want stuff to reflow when the content and/or viewport sizes change.

There are a lot of investment funds like this, usually called something like "ESG" (environmental, social, and governance) funds.

You should never entirely depend on a third party service to run your tests, either.

Separately, if you scrub "plus rules like modus ponens" from my previous comment, do you agree with the rest of it?

"The assumptions A implies B and B implies C, taken together, yield A implies C" is a statement using propositional logic. Like any formal system, propositional logic has axioms (for example, as defined by Frege[0]). Those axioms plus rules like modus ponens are things you need to "assume" to decide the truth value of that statement.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert_system#Frege's_Begriff...

The Curry-Howard correspondence[1] tells us that every function is a proof (in the intuitionistic sense) of the proposition represented by its return type, given the axioms ("context" in the article) represented by its arguments.

This fact is leveraged heavily by proof assistants (as mentioned in the article), but is generally useful in any statically-typed programming language.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspon...

You most definitely don't have to reply. I wasn't really expecting you to.

> I've already moved on

Imagine there's a certain kind of candy that you enjoy. Now imagine you learn that candy is manufactured by literal child slaves, its ingredients include the ground-up bones of an endangered species (which happens to be carcinogenic), and the company which makes it donates all of their profits to political causes that you strongly disagree with. Would you reconsider buying said candy in the future?

Are there any facts or perspectives that you could become aware of which might change your mind about the ethics surrounding large language models? Or is it an entirely closed case for you?

I personally try to keep an open mind about pretty much everything. It's not that I don't have opinions, but they're always subject to change.

To put my cards on the table regarding my current opinions of the current subject: I've historically been pretty anti-copyright; I believe that information wants to be free. However, I'm unsettled by the uneven application of existing intellectual property laws (if these laws are going to exist they should be enforced consistently). I'm undecided as to whether I think LLMs themselves should be considered derivative works of their training material, but I definitely think they're often used to produce derivative works (sometimes unintentionally/unknowingly). None of that means they aren't useful for building cool stuff or that the technology behind them isn't amazing.