bodge5000

Depending on how into 40k you are, you might be surprised to hear that many fans (though arguably closer to tourists, but that's another topic) don't see 40k as a satire at all, or at very least consider the Imperium to be overall a force for good, which I guess in a grim way only adds to the parody that you can be so on the nose about it and the propaganda still holds

I could be misremembering but I seem to recall them saying that their sizing (the reason you had to buy the special sizing kit) was slightly smaller than normal, and now it turns out the rings are coming out slightly bigger, could it be that all along we should've just used normal US ring sizing?

In the former case, which seems more likely, does it not fall to reason that like any tool there'll be some that will benefit from it and some that it just won't work as well for, but are equally as good at their job? Like that neovim, unless your an absolute zealot you wouldnt insist that everyone use it, or hire someone based off it, but those who do work well with it do find it to be a boost to productivity.

Also importantly, can it be a neovim? Neovim hasn't had literal trillions invested over it in the space of just 5 years, local llm's aside can those smaller productivity gains justify the huge investment put into them, and which will continue to be needed for further model development?

Doesn't do much to visualise the ref though who certainly had something to do with that win, but yeh the real loss did come in when we swapped our attack for defence, as soon as they got one in we were done at that point

I meant irreversible to the individual, ie they can't be shown they're corrupt and change their ways

The real question is whether the threshold before it causes irreversible corruption is before or after the point where you can make real change. The latter is obviously quite terrifying as it essentially means that democracy will always be corrupt (unless time is a factor perhaps)

It makes sense to not want to create an admin dash, but to avoid having to keep track of thousands of feature flags in your db, it seems all you're doing here is moving them to another db

If money remains backed by AI goods and services

Why do you think it would? If 99% of people never use those services, why do you expect they'd continue to exist? Just to justify the existence of some temporary class of worker to provide services that, for some reason, aren't fulfilled by the AI?

Your diamond example is just swapping which goods are scarce.

Not at all. If you're starving and someone offers you the last diamond in the world for a weeks worth of food, its unlikely to be a worthwhile trade since without the food you'd die, and then (to you), the diamond is entirely worthless. Scarcity raising prices is a fundamental law of our current economic system, its not a fundamental law of reality

Thats certainly true, but to prevent the worst of the effects of climate change we also need to do much more now than before (its debatable at this point whether its even reversible, that wasn't always the case). I suppose the point is that what was enough a decade ago costed more then than it does now, but thats no longer enough

Things become worth more as they become scarecer, not less.

It's a bit more nuanced than that. Generally speaking, in society as we know it, there's a point at which something becomes so scarce that it's value begins to drop because there's simply no use for it and no reason to find a use for it.

The second part to this is that scarcity-based value is a product of our current society, and we're describing a society that diverges from that. This could go in many different ways, some that could well be a massive improvement to what we currently have, but for the sake of this argument, imagine everything goes very badly and people are starving to death. Would you trade a weeks worth of food for a diamond?

If 99% of people are living effectively outside the economy, those things they could have would too have to be entirely provided by AI (including the mining of materials and building of robots by other robots capable of doing that work). For ordinary people, if money becomes useless why would they take a job at building a shelter or providing private security? They might as well be offering monopoly money

EDIT: An obvious response to this is that workers could be paid in food, rather than money, but that just kicks the can down the road. Who is making the food? The rich would still need to eat, so this would have to be done anyway, but the supply lines needed for food production are far more complex than private security or construction, if you've got that automated you could certainly automate the rest of it without needing workers.

The AI industry, and arguably at this point the tech industry as a whole, isn't concerned with sustainability, as long as they can profit today tomorrow is tomorrow's problem. Who will buy the services, where will data for AI training come from, these are perfectly valid questions but they're questions that don't have an immediate effect on profit, so easier to ignore it until we can't apparently.

The same could be said about environmental concerns. It'll be a lot cheaper to deal with today than deal with when it becomes a problem, but its easier to ignore that and collect the cash from oil and gas whilst its going

I could quite easily ignore all this in the interest of not going through the pain of finding yet another password manager, but having your new CEO specialise in M&A is really hard to ignore.

it seems the PMs are already halfway there to implementation

Halfway there feels way overblown, and only seems to further devalue to work that devs do. Having clearly written requirements would be fantastic, and even as someone less pro AI even I can see great utility for it here, but its not halfway there to implementation. Not even 25% in all honesty, since edge cases and unforeseen consequences can cause changes to the spec midway through development.

Ben Jordan has some great videos on Flock in general, would highly recommend if your not aware of this beyond knowing they're some form of security camera

We are in the minority, but don't think the majority is the opposite and like this kind of thing. The majority just don't care at all about it.

At this point I'm convinced that marketing has been completely taken over by shareholder shills, marketing to customers they wish they had instead of the real customers that exist.

A bit of a tangent here, but the tldr is that I think this has been the case for quite a while.

I don't have any stats to back this up, and maybe someone does and will prove me wrong, but marketing doesnt feel significantly more effective than it was, say, 50 years ago, and yet the main reason every scrap of data about our personal lives is harvested is supposedly for marketing. Maybe it turns out theres just not that much you can do with the data, I'd certainly hope so, but I think a lot of it is just down to the fact that marketing execs don't actually use the data in any meaningful way, like you say marketing to customers they wish they had to buy the idea they were gonna do either way.

Like I remember a decade or so ago, the promise/warning was that advertising and entertainment would seamlessly blend when it can be tailored to exactly you, to the point where people happily and willingly watch advertisements. We got the opposite, adblockers are extremely common, companies have to strong arm you into even looking at their ads, and people count down the seconds until they can press the skip button

Just wish they'd give the FW16 the same treatment, at least in terms of the build. You shouldn't choose a laptop based on looks but thats hitting exactly what I want, minus the 16" screen

This is addressed, though not quantified (I suppose because theres no central repository for that), in the introduction. To use your analogy, the author heard EV sales were through the roof, couldnt find any evidence that more EV's were actually on the road, so looked at tire sales to see if the answer was in there.

Is that specific to looming? I already do a bit of miniature painting which feels like it'd be similar but that takes too much focus to be running background processes, but maybe I'm just not good enough at it yet

I'm not sure I understand the title, does looming help you think or something? I don't really have much inherent interest in looming, but I would have a lot of interest in that

If no one self-writes code anymore anyway, at least use a language that isn't a clusterfuck of bad design decisions

I can get behind the idea that LLM's probably don't need a language designed for humans if humans arent writing it, but the rest of this is just daft. Pythons popularity isn't just pure luck, in fact its only been in recent years that the tooling has caught up to the point where its as easy to setup as it is to write, which should really tell you something if people persevered with it anyway.

I'm sorry your favourite language doesnt have the recognition it so rightfully deserves, but reducing python to just "stupid language for stupid people" is, well, stupid

If you contact Anthropic's sales team and set up monthly invoicing, there's evidently no fixed spending limit.

I don't think thats a smoking gun either, for a start we don't know if the pricing would be the same as you'd get credit-funded, but also a monthly invoicing agreement is closer to their fixed plans (you spend X per month, regardless of usage) than pay-per-use API credits, which may not be profitable.

Not that thats a smoking gun either, I can see it both ways

Nor Dario's frankly, I was supposed to be out of a job by now according to his predictions over the years. I can totally buy that inference is possible, but not because they said it is

A huge number of people are convinced that OpenAI and Anthropic are selling inference tokens at a loss despite the fact that there's no evidence this is true

Theres quite a lot of evidence, no proof I'd agree, but then there's no absolute proof I'm aware to the contrary either, so I don't know where you're getting this from.

The two pieces of evidence I'm aware of is that 1) Anthropic doesn't want their subsidised plans being used outside of CC, which would imply that the money their making off it isn't enough, and 2) last time I checked, API spending is capped at $5000 a month

Like I say, neither of these are proof, you can come up with reasonable arguments against them, but once again the same could be said for evidence on the contrary

If there were truly no other choice, CCP without a doubt. At least they claim to have good intentions, whether that's true or not

Absolutely agree, I do use notebooks but like you say I dont think I need to at all, for some reason I just have some natural drive to write things down (plus I like notebooks). But I've often had experiences of reading through old notebooks and finding that the things I care about in there I instantly remembered without having to read the page, and the things I'd forgotten about I didn't care about anymore.

Its the classic interrogation technique; "we're not here to debate whether your guilty or innocent, we have all the evidence we need to prove your guilt, we just want to know why". Not sure if it makes it any different though that the interrogator knows they are lying

I haven't worked at FAANG so maybe I'm out the loop, but flyers on bathroom stalls seems bizarre, like almost less of a corporate action and more of a personal one (like you might get for unionisation), but with all the messaging of corporate, like something you'd see in a company memo.

Like I say, maybe everyone else is accustomed to this idea, but if you have any pictures of them I think a lot of people would be interested in seeing it, unless I'm misunderstand what it is

That just seems like a completely different argument, Reddit only came into a part of this in relation to Moltbook