fasterik

9 ms·

1.
by fasterik 4d ago
I like Gaben's take on going public. This is a clip from a longer talk he gave which I think is really insightful into many aspects of the economics of software and company culture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvS-I
2.
by fasterik 4d ago
You're catastrophizing and misreading the original comment in an uncharitable way.
3.
by fasterik 4d ago
The American Revolution was very much a discussion about power. Of course, it wasn't just a discussion (we had to fight a war to defend the new form of government), but it was driven by the same concerns about the distribution of pow
4.
by fasterik 4d ago
I don't agree that the argument implies nationalization. Regulation would work if it slowed everyone down at the same rate, enough to mitigate the risks. The problem is that you need regulators who know what they're doing and stro
5.
by fasterik 4d ago
The article is about muscle hypertrophy, not health outcomes. >if you’ve only got an hour a day or whatever for a workout you’re better off spending it all on resistance training. The health benefits of resistance training plateau arou
6.
by fasterik 4d ago
I agree with your analogy, but I don't understand the last part. If I'm working on a hobby project, say a video game, the "tomatoes" I get are the experiences of writing code, playing a level I designed, and sharing it w
7.
by fasterik 4d ago
I think the rules technically exclude the arXiv as a qualifying outlet. Without limiting any other provision in this Section, a publication lacking any of the following characteristics will be deemed not to be a Qualifying Outlet: i. an ed
8.
by fasterik 4d ago
OpenAI said that at public API prices, the agents they ran would have cost $15M. I don't know what their internal pricing is, but it almost certainly cost more than $1M.
9.
by fasterik 5d ago
I don't think the analogy works because for the past few years Tao has been one of the most vocal advocates of AI in mathematics and has used it extensively in his own research. You can find several of his talks about this on YouTube.
10.
by fasterik 5d ago
It's good to start a conversation, and the number of Fields Medalists behind this certainly lends a lot of weight to it. But I'm not seeing a strong argument for misaligned incentives beyond the specific plagiarism allegations. Th
11.
by fasterik 16d ago
I'm not dodging discussing working for a paycheck, that's included under what I called working to meet the need for survival. You asked me what basis I have for saying that many people enjoy working on things, and I gave you examp
12.
by fasterik 16d ago
You're using a narrow definition of work as exchanging labor for a paycheck. I don't agree with that definition. I would define it as putting time and energy into a project to meet personal or organizational needs. One of those ne
13.
by fasterik 16d ago
The case for the "bullshit jobs" theory seems extremely weak to me. If a job is pointless and not adding value, there is an incentive to eliminate it. Markets aren't perfectly efficient of course, but they're not so inef
14.
by fasterik 16d ago
I'm totally in favor of the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake. But if a non-human agent had been one of those participants, does that subtract from the value of the result? I don't think so. >It will be a truly sad world i
15.
by fasterik 16d ago
That's a strange characterization of an article that spends the bulk of the text referencing studies and talking about research practices in psychology. Apart from the No Country for Old Men reference, the images are mostly mental heal
16.
by fasterik 16d ago
>But what's a "recommender system"? Are my friends and family who understand my tastes at a deeper level than an algorithm not a "recommender system"? Not really. "Recommender system" has a pretty nar
17.
by fasterik 16d ago
The article is about improving recommender systems, not replacing them. I generally agree that the best way to discover things is through other information channels like friends and family, reviews, curated critics' lists, etc. Prime V
18.
by fasterik 16d ago
The claim comes from Milch himself. I don't know how much he was exaggerating, or how much of it may be true but didn't make it into the final shooting script. E.B.'s soliloquy isn't in strict blank verse, but there is c
19.
by fasterik 16d ago
I understand the frustration with current recommender systems, but what are the alternatives? Adding a bunch of arbitrary buttons or sliders isn't likely to actually improve the experience. "People who liked this also liked this&q
20.
by fasterik 17d ago
I'm also reminded of how David Milch supposedly wrote a lot of Deadwood in iambic pentameter. I only learned about this after seeing the show, but I did pick up the "Shakespearean" feel of some of the dialogue. Constraints of
21.
by fasterik 17d ago
The encyclical is not anti-AI, so there's not really any contradiction or hypocrisy if AI was used to write it. It's more of a criticism of the "technocratic paradigm" and the potential for abuse of power and lack of acc
22.
by fasterik 17d ago
I don't understand your point. The phrase "when you got the software it got the source code" makes no sense. And arguments were just as common decades ago on forums, mailing lists, and IRC. What exactly are you trying to say?
23.
by fasterik 17d ago
The article is talking primarily about Eastern Europe. It's also not inconsistent to say that it's raining during a drought. That's why we distinguish between weather and climate.
24.
by fasterik 19d ago
>in that scenario you need nuclear capable of supplying ~100% of your power. Where are you getting that from? Again, nuclear doesn't need to be a full backup, and nobody is suggesting we ditch renewables for nuclear. A perfectly v
25.
by fasterik 19d ago
Natural gas and hydro are firm power. You're correct that nuclear is not a good backup power source, but that's not the suggestion. The question is whether adding high-capacity-factor firm generation reduces total system cost. In
26.
by fasterik 19d ago
The problem with 100% solar+batteries is that you need to massively overbuild for the system to meet demand. It's far more cost-effective to have some portion of generation come from a firm, weather-independent source. The main options
27.
by fasterik 19d ago
That's why we use different tools when teaching/learning something vs. doing real work. Another example is computer algebra systems like Mathematica. It would be self-sabotage to use them on your calculus homework, but they'r
28.
by fasterik 20d ago
The cogito argument is about cognitive processes (doubt, deception) which in my view don't depend on phenomenal consciousness. You may be right that the distinction isn't that important, since there's a parallel argument that
29.
by fasterik 20d ago
Ironically, by predicting the most chaotic outcome you're falling for the narrative that AI will transform the economy overnight, which is exactly what AI companies' marketing divisions want you to believe. >More than 90 perce
30.
by fasterik 20d ago
We don't know yet because we don't have a fundamental theory of consciousness. My money is on that it's an objective property of the structure of computation happening in the brain.

More ›