falserum

6 ms·

1.
by falserum 3d ago
Math and computers have benefit of not needing materials. Add a button here, add lema and assumption there - all are almost zero cost&risk. So iteration/experimentation with llm in hand is possible to some degree even for laymen. I
2.
by falserum 3d ago
Gasoline and lighters are abundant. It takes only slight steering mistake to drive into the crowd. Yet we are still here. Yes, terrible stuff happens, but they are extreme outliers. Not sure how this works, but we can trust strangers to qui
3.
by falserum 3d ago
My personal opinion, this doom-mongering about LLMs, is part of marketing campaign to exaggerate LLM capabilities. (Play being: Sociopaths with money will buy or invest if they believe LLMs are powerful things)
4.
by falserum 3d ago
“Technically correct" means a statement or action follows strict rules or exact facts precisely, even if it ignores the wider meaning or real-world intention. I think op was also actually-correct. (For better or worse, that is the obje
5.
by falserum 3d ago
> awful lot of money into legalising CSAM Could I ask what you have in mind (I doubt there was a US bill for that; google won’t help me without knowing what to look for)
6.
by falserum 3d ago
Hate is too strong a word for me personally. But lying (e.g. “full self driving next year”) and cheating (too early inclusion of spacex into various indexes) and whatever dogde was, should explain most of it. Connections with other disliked
7.
by falserum 6d ago
When reading human comments, we should be generous; when we read corporate texts, we may assume paltering. (TIL: paltering: exact and technically correct statement usage to create misleading impression)
8.
by falserum 6d ago
As with all press releases I assume it was written/re viewed/redacted by their lawyers, so: > no specific user data was accessed in order to solve this problem Data was accessed in order to <other purpose> (and then accid
9.
by falserum 2y ago
3-3 invasion takes teritory at the expense of influence (future potential). I think I improved a lot when I stopped 3-3ing (it opened up different style of game for me) Noobies love 3-3 (I definitely did), because it’s kind of simple and fa
10.
by falserum 2y ago
Some part yes (maybe..). But I doubt that it’s majority. Whatever policy you implement, end result must be that stuff costs more and people live with less: virtually no personal cars, no for-fun-flights (vacation), force people to wear same
11.
by falserum 2y ago
I would like to label guilt/innocence as irrelevant. The scenario above, describes the dynamics of how incentives work. As long as consumers expect stuff to be cheap, somebody will step up to provide that (reaping profits). Only highly
12.
by falserum 2y ago
Informative
13.
by falserum 2y ago
Lets start with best country of the world that is made of 300 million consumers and 1000 factory owners (also known as polluters) each of which has identical share of the market. To reduce pollution, factory owners would need to use less p
14.
by falserum 2y ago
if you replace “they” with “prime minister that is hanging by a thread for quite some time”, you would get my personal conspiracy theory.
15.
by falserum 2y ago
Not the author, but I assume he is not against you taking over. Code is still there if you are willing. (It is not too late)
16.
by falserum 2y ago
How extensive safety testing of a hammer should be? Should there be double blind clinical trials for it’s health impact when caried daily on a tool belt? For most people, answer will differ depending on what the hammer is made of (iron vs u
17.
by falserum 2y ago
Can’t argue on that. More transparency is always good for end user.
18.
by falserum 2y ago
I think what parent meant was, all poplar art tries to sarisfy some “algorithm”. (Algorithm of what will masses listen to) 20 years ago that was trying to pick good ratios of bass, haircut, and marketing to get into mtv top ten.
19.
by falserum 2y ago
Does art need to “make a statement”? I think: - It is subjective. - if you enjoy it, then it is art. Doing music for profit is not a new concept, just look at pop music (and especially “boy bands”) But if end result sounds good to a lot of
20.
by falserum 2y ago
Is that actually sketchy though? - Each artist has different royalties, some are more expensive than others. - appearantly people do listen to ”cheaper” artists, in right circumstances - consumers prefer that cost of subscription would be l
21.
by falserum 2y ago
Nice. Are these numbers the same: “0.5 in base10” and “0.1 in base2”?
22.
by falserum 2y ago
I have a further nitpick regarding terminology. Wording like “game is more complex” overal seems incorrect. Game is not complex by itself (for example go rules are extreemly simple), all the difficulty and challenge depends on the skill o
23.
by falserum 2y ago
Is 1/10 (also known as 0.1) a valid number in base 10? What about same number expressed in base 3? (I think in base 3 that would be written as 1/31) And what about number 0.1 in base 3? (Which is equivalent to 1/3 in base 10)
24.
by falserum 2y ago
In neibhouring thread that deeper difference appeared to be: “PI is not actually a number.”
25.
by falserum 2y ago
> 1/3 is also a special kind of procedure. Important to note: When ggp asked for a recursive procedure to generate real numbers, they wanted that exactly same proceedure would generate all reals (not special procedure for each numbe
26.
by falserum 3y ago
Fun. What about 1/3, 1/7, …? Previously outlines recursive procedure doesn’t generate those. But yeah, if you deny existance of irrational numbers, and redefine Real:=Rational, then you can generate these “real” numbers recursivel
27.
by falserum 3y ago
Thanks for reply. When will this reach PI or e or sqrt(2)? (There are infinitely many numbers that will not be reached by this procedure)
28.
by falserum 3y ago
1, 1.1, 1.01, 1.001, … This will never reach 2, so it will not generate all real numbers. (Which was what parent was asking for, to recusively generate all R)
29.
by falserum 3y ago
> proof of infinity This combination of words seems strange. Like: proof of ‘zero’ or proof of ‘left’. All of them have definitions, not proofs. (Qualitative distinction of different infinity types has a proof though)
30.
by falserum 3y ago
> I'm happy to accept that I have two apples of my desk if all my friends and the guy I bought them from agree with that definition. That’s useful, but very vague, and very movable criteria for “exists”. (Approx. Must be based in ph

More ›