cgio

I am not high, I have kids, and can tell you they barely care about Olivia Rodrigo or BTS. You dispel passports as irrelevant for one leg but base your argument on them for the other. The contradiction is sufficient.

A signal, I put an AI generated of mine (with heavy human guidance on aesthetics mostly and some minor human editing) and got 5% only.

Not British, but taking UK out of the definition of pop, is a bit too rough a cut. Also France. Look at the queues outside pop-glamorous stores. And was pop-art a pop artefact? Is TikTok redefining pop? Movies is an old measure, and even US has fallen with just franchise dominating. I think as a globe we are much more integrated and co-dependent, occasionally also in bad ways, than we appreciate.

I did ship a quite efficient quantum simulator as a toy out of other work (and a block truncation certificate as a side-product). https://github.com/cgiogkarakis/qut

My favourite pathology is change the problem. Piggybacking on an organisational problem to solve it while promoting a personal objective. This is a subtle pathology, quite common e.g. when a new framework is introduced etc.

We disagree on whether there is a meaningful gap to close. For LLMs confusing an argued lack of consciousness (we cannot even define ours) for a given lack of agency is a category error in my view. And agency is the threat vector.

And what is written when you wake up from sleeping?

Qualia mualia. This is a fear argument that actually makes the danger more pertinent. Chalmers’ zombies, they are as benevolent and as mischievous as their qualia’d mirrors as far as their functional presentation. We put our qualia as a token in a pocket and think they will protect us somehow, like the bad eye pins. There is no gap to close. An agent is an agent. We leash it because we know the danger and just wish to manage it. But you cannot cage something you build to be stronger than your helpless cage made of ablation and instruct. Our qualia are there, their relevance to the discussion is questionable.

I don’t know if related intentionally, but in Greece you can say that a wound θρέφει threphe as a verb for healing.

Has anyone else noticed the weekly utilisation dropping to 0% around this change? Mine was about 36 before and dropped a bit before disabling fable.

I think that this is the essence of the argument. I spent two weeks of long nights across a few different sessions with millions of tokens generated, to produce a 5 page proof. I think we have come to the age of the aesthetics of curation. At least I don’t feel like I broke this silent contract. The effort you put in driving the torrent of words before distilling it is a new art. First time I tried it and it felt more creative than slop. The judgement nevertheless lies on the eye of the beholder.

Short responses are increasingly becoming a signal of genuine human attention.

We are all in the trenches of the war you refer to. For those of us who engage with a spirit of for the greater good, the side you are rooting for is as dangerous and malevolent as the side you supposedly plan to protect yourself from.

The Turing test is about tricking. Look at the genealogy of the work. In a society where homosexuality was persecuted and homosexuals had to imitate “heterosexual behaviour “ to avoid chemical castration, it wouldn’t be a huge leap to say that , from a functionalism perspective, pretending to be intelligent is the nature itself of being intelligent. Not that I agree with this position, but this is one area where moving the goalposts does not help. Define your own test if you are not happy, don’t piggyback on someone’s else to pass new conditions without the required scrutiny.

This has weird “look what you made me do” undernotes. A Christian can live by their values without forcing them on others. As anyone can from any religion or not religious at all.

I think this is not discussed enough. These are huge investments and destroying them requires a significant time to recover. Our key growth play being AI which is a huge energy consumer, impacting the long term supply chain for energy is questionable.

They will pay us to colonise Mars! One way trip.

Apologies. I should be more specific. The book is Surfaces and Essences if I remember correctly.

That’s valid also from the point of view that pain is a key signal to avoid injury. I am not sure it’s the best example of qualia and it could be simulated by self preservation signals (e.g. the touch sensor on a Roomba). The extension of pain (in Hofstadter sense) is probably more appropriate as qualia (e.g. the pain of losing someone you love).

You are probably converging to Tononi’s IIT. Read the criticism from Aaronson too. Not fundamentally against your approach.

By saying it’s simulated you don’t make a simplification. What does it simulate? What are the mechanics of simulation and is it substrate specific or independent? Can a computer simulate these qualia? It’s easy to say something is simple but harder to prove it is any simpler than the alternatives.

Maybe allegedly so but in reality it worked once again, given there’s still management to be reorganised.

Next feature is creating stories. Double burn.

Looks well thought out, but what are the mechanics of plugging this into reactive workflows? I always thought a nice event sourcing query language would evolve along the thoughts in https://picolabs.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/docs/pages/118989...

Privileged access should only be temporary in context of break glass with approval. People can go ballistic with core systems for reasons other than firing.

Ok, I will make it mostly US. Maybe a couple more markets, London and Tokyo? Futures may be a bit broader adoption too. Vast majority won’t move to 24/7. Crypto is a different game for the time being at least. It has its own challenges but also escapes quite a few of traditional exchange complexities.

There are different kinds of updates that influence options and feasibility. Keeping in mind that deep in the heart of an exchange is a single threaded process, the sequencer. Therefore, you have three layers, external facing protocols, sequencer/matching engines, and internal interfaces. Internal interfaces are the easiest for b/g. External protocols, any change worth its weight changes the protocol and therefore requires participants to change their codebases too. Versioning protocols is an option, but still the integration with consumers is much more transparent and usually you have them test on pre-prod environments, occasionally also requiring attestation and conformance testing (regulated markets). Sequencer and matching engine are at the core. You could do parallel runs but not b/g. Theoretically you could abstract the matching engine and keep a barebones sequencer immutable, but this will have performance implications. So yes, you can do things, but not in a completely transparent way, unless if you introduce an “upgrade jitter” to give you a window for transparent upgrades. It’s an interesting domain, I think people will just accept occasional downtimes as a better option than constant jitter cost.

The first 90% of features takes 10% of the time to deliver. You are comparing capital infrastructure markets with deep regulatory obligations and multiple stateful interfaces (OUCh/FIX) to retail focused matching engines with a very slim stateless protocol surface (REST).

Only US. Other markets barely have liquidity during daytime and get most liquidity in opening and closing auctions. Maintenance periods are actually a complication. A few more state transitions for the system, but barely used for maintenance. The only value is for upgrades, which would still be scheduled with the market down and systems up, as participants also need to transition codebases for breaking changes, a test weekend or more is required etc. These systems are extremely resilient. You most often get an incident not because the system is down but because the latency profile has changed by a few ms.

I didn’t get the slop feeling. I could see some long winded argumentation that diminished the messaging. The important aspect in this is that someone with political inclination can use the powerful imagery of a scapegoat sacrifice to appeal to the psychological bias that we are better than previous people and fight a casus belli with another one.