sram1337

As much as I agree with the message, this reads like marketing copy trying to make a big deal out of a tiny model being hosted privately.

I believe that's exactly what it is

Cool game. Most everything worked which is nice. The fishing game was more fun than I expected. Took a while to understand the UI though.

I've heard it defined as the ability to learn quickly. Not just in the narrow, academic sense, but also by observing the world and people and drawing conclusions about them. It has to do with pattern recognition and abstraction.

Usually these people are knowledgeable because they are constantly learning. Eventually they become wise.

What do you think of that definition?

I think you misunderstood the article. 210 IQ isn't enough. The man with 210 IQ is happy not because he has 210 IQ but because he made the choice to be happy.

Having a high IQ isn't enough - you must also choose to be happy.

Just wanted to say I think we all watched the same video! I remember doing this one summer in high school

I appreciate what seems like an attempt to make a "smart camera" that gets out of the way of the player and unburdens them from having to control both a player and the perspective of the camera. That burden, of controlling two entities (player and camera) is large for people who are unused to playing video games.

Was this dynamic on your radar when building the game and camera system? Would love to hear your thoughts.

I would love to read some of this. Where do you find AI generated fiction?

In my opinion there is no such thing as too much dork time. This post is fun, just like cooking. The onion-inspired font for the section titles is fun. The interactive graphs are fun. Also vibe coding is fun.

What was the point of this judgmental comment?

Some context from the dev's blog (https://highrise.digital/blog/building-offline-kids-a-direct...

---

"Within the last few weeks, Mark and I have built and launched Offline.Kids.

It’s a website to help parents reconnect with their kids and for kids to reconnect with the world around them.

Offline.Kids is directory of screen-free activities for all ages. Each activity is categorised so that parents can find appropriate activities for their situation.

For example, you can find:

quick, clean activities for a 6 year olds outdoor kids activities that take 1-2 hours low energy indoor crafts We built the site off the back of our new directory landing page plugin (catchy name still in progress!). It instantly creates thousands of SEO friendly landing pages for the activities. It’s early days, but Google is successfully indexing the pages and we’ll see how the rankings change over time.

So, if you’re looking for screen-free activities for your kids, check out the website, and share with anyone you think might find it useful!"

relevant PG essay https://paulgraham.com/writes.html

I disagree its "fake art."

Criticize the process of creating it all you want.

I take issue with the term "fake podcast." This is like calling AI generated art "fake art."

The issue they have is with low-quality content. If the AI generated content was better than most human-created podcasts and were making their engagement numbers go up, I doubt they would be calling them fake or removing them.

That is an issue with general use LLM apps like ChatGPT - they have to have wide appeal, so if you want replies that are differ from what the average user wants, you're going to have a bad time.

OpenAI has said they are working on making ChatGPT's output more configurable

This is the voodoo that excites me.

Examples I found interesting:

Semantic map lambdas

  S = Symbol(['apple', 'banana', 'cherry', 'cat', 'dog'])
  print(S.map('convert all fruits to vegetables'))
  # => ['carrot', 'broccoli', 'spinach', 'cat', 'dog']

  # Contextual greeting comparison
  greeting = Symbol('Hello, good morning!')
  similar_greeting = 'Hi there, good day!'

  # Compare with specific greeting context
  result = greeting.equals(similar_greeting, context='greeting context')
  print(result) # => True

  # Compare with different contexts for nuanced evaluation
  formal_greeting = Symbol('Good morning, sir.')
  casual_greeting = 'Hey, what\'s up?'

  # Context-aware politeness comparison
  politeness_comparison = formal_greeting.equals(casual_greeting, context='politeness level')
  print(politeness_comparison) # => False

  # Semantic logical conjunction - combining facts and rules
  horn_rule = Symbol('The horn only sounds on Sundays.', semantic=True)
  observation = Symbol('I hear the horn.')
  conclusion = horn_rule & observation # => Logical inference

OP, what inspired you to make this? Where are you applying it? What has been your favorite use case so far?

re: numbers, you could store them as integers, but just encoded as 10 times their value. So 1.5 becomes 15.

Would reduce max score to 400M and you'd have to round 0.25 up or down. Would probably want to drop the 0.01 cards too.

super cool project

nice find

There's no science behind it. You're reading ai generated text.

My guess is the prompt was something like this:

"describe a color palette generating tool that uses the magic of polar coordinates to make pretty color palettes"

The video was funny. It appeared to think and rethink through the same thought process ~7 times. Seemed like overkill.

Great addition regardless. Good to see open weight model progress.

...or your job goes from commanding a $200k/yr salary to $60k/yr. Hopefully that's enough to pay your mortgage.

What do you think the link is about then?

"Aha, 'monocausotaxophilia', finally a name for the thing causing all my problems!"

Have you seen the YouTube Watch Together app on Discord? It's built into the client

Bananas are a staple food crop in some parts of Africa.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matoke

Really? It looks like everyone just opens the app, one person hosts, and everyone scans their phone. Done. Works over wifi. No "searching" for the hosted server.

20 seconds vs. 30 minutes to drive to the store and back.

Can you have it link to en.m.wikipedia.com for mobile apps?

I don't know what's in the database, so I don't know what to search for.

How about a browse feature?

That butterfly is very distracting. So much so that I didn't read the article.

I don't see a way to make it go away

Who are you writing for?

You can skip about half the article

Language models are capable of producing and digesting substantial volumes of text. More text than any single person should ever be expected to handle in the course of a lifetime. Compared to the speed at which a human can read and write, these models are the linguistic equivalent of a chainsaw. It’s much the same with computer vision, and generative algorithms producing videos and images of events that never occurred and things that don’t exist.

It’s my belief that, in our current artificial intelligence boom’s haste to grab as much business as possible, we are essentially handing out chainsaws to unqualified and inexperienced people who don’t appreciate the responsibility entrusted to them, and who probably don’t require such power in the first place. And that is not the consumers’ fault—this is all on the companies that are pushing it into their laps.

Some would say that, compared to the tangible hazards of losing a bodily extremity or dropping a pine trunk through the bedroom ceiling, misuse of AI by irresponsible or malicious actors sounds downright genteel. But think about how quickly memes and misinformation flow through social media and the larger internet. Whoever first used the word “viral” to describe such spread, they hit that nail right on the head.Social media craves that stuff, and AI provides the almost effortless ability to produce unlimited quantities of exactly what it desires. And the reward for the creator, as much as the users of an AI product can be called the “creator” of that content, is a shower of likes, reposts, updoots, badges, and the tiny dribble of dopamine brought by those things. Thus the system perpetuates itself.

Unlike the venerable chainsaw, AI doesn’t give any indication that it is being misused. It doesn’t growl, shake, kick, or protest. It doesn’t even give a useful indication that “hey this result might be completely useless hogwash, I dunno.” The user doesn’t get to see what happens inside, or know precisely where the information originally came from, or evaluate how the model may have compromised reality to produce an output that looked plausibly like something a human would accept. It just hums along quietly, churning out line after line of approximately whatever it believed was asked of it.

Posting this in light of some of the discussions around Terminal of Truths and hyperstition

Can you assume that +/-5% isn't linearly distributed? If so, the tolerance in practice may likely end up even smaller.