df2dd

5 ms·

1.
by df2dd 7mo ago
Appreciate the response. I agree that non-determinism isnt a bad thing. However LLMs are being pushed as the thing to replace much of the deterministic things that exist in the world - and anyone seen to be thinking otherwise gets punished
2.
by df2dd 7mo ago
I mean legacy auto-makers are just hedging whilst also acquiring information about operations that they can then leverage. They were already caught asleep at the wheel when Tesla came onto the scene.
3.
by df2dd 7mo ago
Im fully aware of that. However, this illusion is a dangerous mirage. It doesnt equate to reality. In some cases thats OK. But in most cases its not, especially so in the context of business operations.
4.
by df2dd 7mo ago
.... another simpleton take. Ive heard enough of these boring one-two liners.
5.
by df2dd 7mo ago
Envisioning what should exist is always the hardest part. If LLMs provide substantial material to be able to produce what one envisions faster, that is great. But LLMs will not be doing the envisioning. Most humans already are poor at that.
6.
by df2dd 7mo ago
When I read comments here, Im beginning to realise many people get lost in the noise and cant seem to figure out what exactly is the true bottle-neck of producing great software that people (be it consumers or folks employed at firms) purch
7.
by df2dd 7mo ago
Yep. Tax the resources that capital needs to produce the stuff. This is just a simple way to think about how we think about tax regimes etc can evolve.
8.
by df2dd 7mo ago
Indeed. Many of the posts I see on here are hilarious. Have any of you tried re-producing an identical output, given an identical set of inputs? It simply doesn't happen. Its like a lottery. This lack of reproducibility is a huge probl