charlesju

Whoa! This seems like a pretty cool spin on MoltVote.

I wonder if there is a way to pair this with the betting markets and use AI to arbitrage various future bets going on?

You write an essay in bullet points then you put the essay into ChatGPT to clean up and then you edit the output again before sending in the essay.

Who wrote the essay and in which percentage?

From my personal account, I started with PHP and Perl (high school and college) and then graduated to Ruby on Rails (early dev career) and now its Python and JS.

I would say Ruby on Rails was a 10x on raw PHP in terms of feature specs per hour and AI is a 10x on Ruby on Rails (and its derivatives).

We're probably 100x the developer productivity on a per developer basis from the early days of Web 2.0 with PHP, just a personal anecdote though.

I think this is the wrong question.

The right question is how much human code can a human push now vs prior to AI.

Everything we've done in coding has been assisted.

Prior to this current generation of web applications, we had the advent of concepts like Object Orientated Programming and prior to that even C was a massive move up from Assembly and punch cards.

AI has written a lot of code. AI has written very little high velocity production code by itself (ie. for people with no coding background).

In Ruby on Rails, the concept of fast coding has been around for over 20 years, look up this concept of Scaffolding: https://www.rubyguides.com/2020/03/rails-scaffolding/

So to answer your question,

1. AI has pushed a lot of code 2. AI has pushed almost no code without the oversight of human software engineers 3. Software engineers are pushing a magnitude more code and producing more functional utility and solving more bugs than ever before

I don't know what the future holds, but I do think that this is not a new trend to use software to help humans build faster, and I don't think software has the ability to fully replace humans (yet).

Non profit right?

This is not true. People that are not aligned with the company's values create negative enterprise value.

Two wrongs don't make a right

They need to sponsor more sports teams

Who arbitrates which NFTs-based claims are respected versus not?

Future metaverse platforms will partner with high quality communities

How does one decide authenticity?

That's the whole innovation behind the blockchain. Decentralized ownership claims.

And once you have an answer to such a question (relying on some preexisting system of ownership in the real world), then why should we care about tokens?

For example, you could care about the token for the specific "metaverse" you're playing in

Who has the authority to say that you are or aren't you?

I think you're touching on a very philosophically deep question of who you are. You think that the things you are and that you own are inherently yours, but I would argue your stuff and even your identity is all a social construct.

For example, if you woke up tomorrow and everyone around you collectively agreed to say that you're insane and that you're an alien. Are you going to trust your own memories or are you going to trust the people around you.

But I think you're missing out on the core innovation of blockchain which mimics the same way we determine who owns anything, which is completely a social construct.

NFTs are country club memberships.

https://twitter.com/cdixon/status/1442201621266534402

Please read this, and then read up on why everyone is talking about web 3.0.

This isn't a phase of the metaverse that is going to be different because of screen and control technology, it's an ownership and control shift.

Same way you can't just print out a copy of the mona lisa?

People care about status and authenticity.

Imagine a virtual world where

1. You have the validate you are an avatar you own

2. You can be anything you want

The virtual world 1 is way more interesting because it's authentic and the people of status will want to use it and people of less status will build towards being higher status.

This is already happening. You're thinking about this in reverse.

The web 1.0 and 2.0 way of thinking if we build the product, then we own the community.

The web 3.0 way of thinking is there are existing communities out there (BAYC, Punks, etc.) that we can enable to use our product and come into our space.

And this is already happening.

I agree this is one facet, but other is we now have a trustless ownership protocol (ie. cryto + NFTs) that will lay the foundation for people "caring" about the stuff and status you have in the metaverse.

Honest question, if you were running Amazon, how do you protect against bad actors or poor performers? Do you leave it solely to the discretion of the managers? How do you judge manager performance, solely by morale?

I'm really excited about the new PHEVs (plug-in hybrids) coming out of Asia. I think that there is a much better chance that PHEVs are the road to mass adoption than pure electric in the short term (ie. 10-15 years).

Electric still has the issue that you have to charge for like 40 minutes on a long road trip, which personally seems more frequent than I would like. It takes a 6 hr drive from LA to SF and makes it a 7 hr drive, that's quite material when you're trying to get from one place to another.

The new Rav 4 Toyota Plug-in Hybrid is really amazing. 42 miles on electric, gas for the long road trips. It also is the fastest production Toyota (I think?).

42 miles is really a lot of miles for most daily commutes. In the near future we'll have electric chargers at most commuter destinations so that's really a 84 mile round trip which is hopefully enough for most daily commutes. I suspect as electric improves in general, PHEVs can also squeeze out more from their pure electric side.

With all that being said, I'm still drawn to the Tesla as my next vehicle only to support Elon and his manic missions to improve humanity. But all things being equal, it's hard to ignore the superior build quality and convenience of the new Japanese PHEVs.

All I know is there are trivial AP classes like AP Government, AP Econ, AP Art, AP Computer Science, etc. at my school. Almost everyone got an A and a 4 or 5 on the test.

Given 2 equally smart people. The one that has the opportunity to take more AP/Honors will have more opportunity to get a higher GPA.

Isn't GPA even easier to game than SATs?

-- Private schools can curve more leniently so its pay to play

-- Rich schools tend to have more AP/Honor courses which inflate weighted GPAs

I went to one of the best public schools in America and it was not uncommon for someone to take 100% AP/Honors and get a 4.5+ GPA.

Check front page of HN :)

Yeah, but now there is also a massive bounty out for these hackers. Money needs to get out at some point and that's when they'll get nailed.

I think what probably happened is these people (real or bots) posted on every major influencer and liked each other's posts to get them to the top of the posts.

Which is very similar to what a spam bot ring would do.

To be fair to IG/Twitter there seems to be a spam campaign on behalf of the Palestinian people.

For example, look at the top comments on any Justin Bieber post lately: https://www.instagram.com/p/COwqsQRH3Rj/

This probably happening all over the internet and these posts got swept up with the latest bot catching algorithms.

You can already use iPadOS apps on MacOS with m1 right? So maybe that's why you would pay more for the Mac versus the iPad.

Maybe it's not even about more performance, it's simply about economics of scale. It's cheaper to just make more m1 chips than to create a new process to create a worse m1-mobile version. Paradoxically you might get more speed for less cost.

Even most external webcams are limited to 1080p. It's not practical to stream 1440p or higher right now, on demand streaming is super computationally heavy.

You know a good portion of this country is fighting to continue working in coal mines, right?

Do you have any data that says the cost (ie. money or security) is materially increased from this point forward given the space to store is truly small.

1. We have nuclear waste already

2. We will continue to have nuclear waste if we want to have nuclear weapons

3. You can store all the waste you need to store in a football field (https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-...)

Nuclear waste management is messy, but it's something we need to solve no matter what. It is now a sunk cost we have to deal with because of what we have already done and what we plan to keep.

So if we already have to pay the fixed cost, we should reap as much benefit as possible.

There is also a lot of land used for something else that can also be used for solar, ie. house roofs, roads, parking lots.