u385639

About a year ago I thought this would settle down but it's only gotten worse. I suppose the llm anthropomorphizing will continue until morale improves

Generational transfer is very important to me and the main reason I build my "antilibrary".

Not only has tech based "browsing" failed to even come close to the power of a full bookshelf, it has absolutely no transfer quality.

I want my kids to see my bookshelf!

Great post. I wonder how much this can improve if you RAG-ify a diverse set of contextual data, for example calendar, meals, recent conversations from the real world, etc.

It's also interesting that бля was translated to 'damn'. :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_inference

I'm not a critic of AI or moving any goal posts. I'm not lobbing comments in a vacuum. I was responding directly to the comical proposal that we don't need actors anymore, to which my Godfather comment has every relevance. Thanks anyway!

We must be speaking past each other. I am not out for acclaim and sorry for any confusion. Everything you say is exactly the point I'm trying to make, evidently clumsily. The "mysterious thing" is the human element. I don't know what else to call it? Humans that ace tests prove only that they are good at acing tests. Not that they're good at running businesses or practicing law. Not creating films (in this example), or music, etc.

I am not knocking the advancements, the capabilities are incredible. But machines have been doing what humans cannot since the dawn of time. I'm just pointing out what I think (thought?) was obvious: machines will soon be able to do just about everything that doesn't really matter.

PS. are you familiar with Wittgensteins ruler? Ask chatGPT about it.

I scored 159 on the LSAT in 2014, so I am not claiming the tests are easy. I am pointing out that when an AI aces them, it says more about the test than anything else.

Of course it would be easier. I agree. I just take issue with the "why humans" thing because if anything, the recent advancements highlight just how big the human element really is.

Can you imitate a Bach prelude? Sure. And only people who aren't actually familiar with his music would be impressed.

Much of AI approaching "human performance", is it approaching the lowest bar. There's a Wittgenstein thing going on here. That an LLM can ace the LSAT or GMAT is mostly an indictment of those tests.

A little off topic.

Please try to make an original movie that meets the standard of, say, The Godfather, with AI.

You don't have to imagine it, it's already the way it is. A company social hierarchy is just a little more forgiving than a high school.

As far as tech goes the US "gets back in return" the best talent coming out of Canadian universities. This isn't exactly peanuts.

Bill maher, musk, russel brand have called Trudeau hitler. These aren't unreasonable positions.

What?

Anyone know if breath is also connected to specific body parts? Really crude contrived example to illustrate what I mean: deep breathing affecting the left arm, shallow breathing affecting the right arm?

I always felt there must be some connection but never really understood how to even investigate. I definitely noticed that certain deep breathing was extraordinarily useful for alleviating IBS symptoms... basically the physical expansion of the lungs (contracting the diaphragm) clearly physically pressed upon the intestinal tract and massaged it (this is personal experience, anecdotal)... I have always wondered if this principle was extendable further?

Everything I've seen about the lungs is always about what it does for oxygen/co2 regulation in the blood... feels like this really underestimates whats going on

How will we teach other animals to stop eating other animals?

Not sure why you're getting flack it's a great question and you can learn a lot about your candidate as you work through it.

Peculiarly low bar for "American Dream".

Can you recommend a translation?

That a group doesn't treat failure the same way as an individual is practically tautological in the sense that the power of a group vis a vis outcome (whether ~success or ~failure) is precisely that it's not an individual, but a proxy, "holding" it. In other words it makes no sense for a "group" to admit failure - that's why you put the group together, and that's why, generally speaking, not everyone gets fired when shit hits the fan. What is the insight here?

This is interesting - provoking. Can you share some authors/material that has influenced your awakening, so to speak?

I believe your 3 points are covered by dishonesty, and perhaps the writing process can be said to be a potential cure for "lack of X". Still, when one is competent and has something to say, writing is not difficult in the sense being discussed, only technically.

We do miss out on getting featured in the tech media. TechCrunch published a story about our growth once (thanks to the VCs who were sharing a list of fastest growing open source startup) but otherwise, we get no coverage that VC-funded startups get.

This isn't because you're bootstrapped, it's likely because you don't have a PR team pitching on your behalf. That's how stories get placed.

Congrats!

This is especially tough because of how much skill it takes for you the questioner to not make the other person feel stupid when they realize they can't answer your questions.

I was clumsily pointing out the oddity of saying "ever" in a rule ostensibly "general" aka with exceptions. Otherwise, it just looks like a preference to me. Why should (3) never exist at all? I've definitely found features that have existed for a long time in a product and wished I somehow new earlier. Does it mean they could have designed it better? Perhaps. An app driven nudge is a hammer, sure, but it's not a sacred violation.

I can understand that there are places/screens/experiences where you'd like some peace and quiet but the idea that communication with technology should as a "general rule" not "ever. ever ever" be anything but unidirectional from user to device is absurd.

Interesting. Marc is a nuanced guy of course but I sense he may have shifted in the last while. I recall in his 1:1 w/ Peter Thiel he took the opposing side of this argument. Peter does not mince words re: the progress of "science". Perhaps Marc was just doing it for the sake of discussion.

The pushback is confusing. If this approach continues to catch adoption a self deployable OS clone is inevitable.

Do slightly less intelligent people have non flawed brains because they were forced to do more work in an allegedly poor education system? Your brain is not flawed, and certainly not cursed, except perhaps by its own silliness.

Agree with your comments on leadership!

Okay please share what made it click to you as a "fundamental global revolution"

Consider taking the statement in the context of the argument made in the letter.

While the advice is good advice overall, it stumbles on its own hindsight.

Break whatever you’re trying to learn down into use cases. Start with bite sized chunks that take a few minutes and build on them incrementally. “Learning python” is too broad. Installing python, printing hello world, installing and using a dependency, reading from a file, etc. are more well-defined, and it’s easier to know when you’re done, therefore helping to reinforce progress.

Yes "learning python" is too broad, but the subtlety here is that it's usually actually "learn my first programming language", in which case it's unlikely you would understand how to break anything up into any steps. If "learning python" is not your first language then the advice is just obvious.

The truth is that the only advice that matters is "don't give up" and "have the courage to learn however you want" because there is no such thing as "teaching".