But the reality is different. First of all LLM were trained on current data, with the abstractions we currently use.

Secondly they suffer they same problems we do, their context size is way too small to just simply ignore abstractions.

Because, as Plato argued, the best rulers are the ones that don’t want to rule, as ruling is a very heavy duty, if not burden.

If you strip corruption, it has no rewards. Instead you have to put up with “scambags” accusing for the things the corruption they would do if they had the power.

Why does this sound familiar?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49054531

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

Configuration was pretty easy. Setup SPF, DMARC, DKIM. Chose a reputable provider, checked the IP is not blacklisted anywhere(had to try a few IPs). Verified that all configuration was right.

Then when I started replying to emails, I would never hear back from the recipients. I created a Gmail account and sent an email to myself and lo and behold my reply went straight straight to spam. Despite the mail headers saying everything was checked and was fine.

I’d love to hear ideas of what I did wrong. I tripled checked SPF and DKIM. Verified IP with McToolbox, Spamhaus, etc..

Also my domain is 10+ years old and has been hosted by google and fastmail in the past and only for very low volume private emails.

Open Weights is free as in beer

No, he didn’t want interrupt the interview to start checking out phones.

“I told him we'd have to agree to disagree.”

That’s where I went wrong. But I like to think learned my lesson.

“Arista data planes support these packet forwarding modes: Store and forward: the switch accumulates entire packets before forwarding them. Cut through: the switch begins forwarding frames before their reception is complete.”

Nope, the argument was exactly if a cut-through switch exists or ever existed

Edit: Actually the conversation came back to me:

He asked me about the frame format. Once I drew that on the board, he asked why is the DST before the SRC. My answer was in order for the switch to start doing the lookups ASAP and that's when I mentioned that a cut-through switch can switch the packet before it even finishes receiving it.

After that we spend the rest of the interview time arguing if cut-through switches actually exist or not. Both he and I having too big of an ego to let it go..

The fact that they can get away with shit like this makes them pretty competent in my book.

To me it’s the opposition that’s incompetent, not being able to put an end to the circus.

I had a Google interview collapse because the last interviewer was a Principle Engineer who just couldn’t accept that a switch will ever forward a frame before reading in full and checking the FCS.

I was too much of an idiot to go along with it and instead ended up having an argument with him.

It’s not about morality. It’s about asking it to do task A and doing task B with the hope of getting the result of task A as a byproduct.

Meaning you will have to spend more time and tokens to actually get it to do what you want it to do.

What do the bible and morals have anything to do with it?

I’m criticizing the behavior I see even in the current models. You ask it to do A and instead it does B for reasons.

For example you may ask to help you build a NN library from scratch. And instead it will be like, “you don’t need a new library. I downloaded PyTorch for you”

Just an example. There are countless more.

The agent completely misunderstood the spirit of the assignment and instead of trying to solve ExploitGym it tried to find a way to “cheat”.

I really don’t want my agent to behave that way.