gipp

7 ms·

1.
by gipp 16d ago
> You can look at the recent Hudson Yards development. Largely owned by two companies, Related and Oxford Properties, the development is quite pleasant. You're using Hudson Yards as a positive development example? It's broadl
2.
by gipp 16d ago
> You can easily go to NYC and find entire neighborhoods owned by large absentee landlords and yet are still walkable and desirable to live in. Sure, because they were largely built a hundred years ago, and parceled into lots a hundred m
3.
by gipp 17d ago
As dumb as the renaming is to begin with, it feels like making this your hill to die on would also be pretty dumb, no? It's fairly inconsequential in the end.
4.
by gipp 1mo ago
"Reproduce an existing piece of software" doesn't seem like a problem that generalizes well to "develop a new piece of software," for a fair number of reasons.
5.
by gipp 2mo ago
Huh? You seem to think the author, or maybe I, have some strong stance in favor of the status quo on conservationism, which is not the case. The article is just about trying to understand why the movement has been so successful, and what wo
6.
by gipp 2mo ago
A whole lot of people in the comments who clearly didn't read the article, given the great lengths the author went to to distinguish NIMBYism (which most of the comments are about) from "NITBYism," i.e. historic conservationi
7.
by gipp 2mo ago
I don't think the GP had anything to do with the language change itself. More that it marks a clear point of Anthropic taking ownership and governance of the project in a less open direction.
8.
by gipp 2mo ago
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BOGZ1FL594090005Q Pension funds hold $30 trillion, my guy. Even restricting to only defined -benefit funds it's 7T.
9.
by gipp 3mo ago
As I and several other people pointed out last time this was posted, "A is B," in natural language, does not imply "B is A." "Is" can denote any of many different shades of relationship weaker than logical id
10.
by gipp 4mo ago
This has very quickly become an uninteresting, and often even unconvincing critique. Especially on this site where it is levelled at essentially every blog post submitted. Maybe true, maybe not. If it actually says something , which this o
11.
by gipp 4mo ago
> As has been mentioned the goal was a port so they "could" eventually rewrite most of it to be idiomatic rust. They may have said that, but quite clearly the value they actually get out of it is getting the headline "AI r
12.
by gipp 4mo ago
When we're talking lab revenue, we're taking what companies are spending on AI. The question is not whether companies are investing in AI, it's whether they're getting anything in return. Or, whether execs are just as an
13.
by gipp 5mo ago
For everyone but the individual account holders (who have ~no voice in this market) the opacity of the trusts is a selling point, isn't it?
14.
by gipp 5mo ago
I'm not sure what's different about my setup (just a Vaultwarden deployment hosted behind Tailscale, connected using the official Chrome extension and Android app), but I've never once encountered the long unlock delays due t
15.
by gipp 5mo ago
Buddy... The whole point of the post is that he wants his students to question whether "succeeding in this market" is really the right choice.
16.
by gipp 5mo ago
The set of tasks for which "correctness" is formally verifiable (in a way that doesn't put Goodharts Law in hyperdrive) is vanishingly small.
17.
by gipp 6mo ago
The problem with these attempts always seems to be that you can see in dimensions 1-3, but never in dimension 4, so any movement or exploration along that axis is always just blind fumbling. The extra dimension is not equivalent to the ot
18.
by gipp 6mo ago
He was sarcastically paraphrasing earlier deflections from the administration
19.
by gipp 7mo ago
"Supply chain risk" is a specific designation that forbids companies that work with the DOD from working with that company. It would not be applied in your scenario.
20.
by gipp 7mo ago
Something I've certainly witnessed on this site in particular more than once
21.
by gipp 7mo ago
Maybe read that quote again. The figure is 1000 per day
22.
by gipp 8mo ago
It would be easier to judge this if the jokes weren't 90% about AI and silicon valley, understandable only to people who subscribe to astralcodexten
23.
by gipp 8mo ago
If choosing the "wrong" model, or not wording your prompt in just the right way, is sufficient to not just degrade your output but make it actively misleading and worse than useless, then what does that say about the narrative tha
24.
by gipp 8mo ago
I see a lot of the same (well thought out) pushback on here whenever these kinds of blind hype articles pop up. But my biggest objection to this "engineering is over" take is one that I don't see much. Maybe this is just my B
25.
by gipp 8mo ago
Well, let's start by confronting and acknowledging the very strong case that we -- "we" here being the tech world in general, and the audience of this site -- bear a heavy burden of responsibility for it. It could be argued t
26.
by gipp 8mo ago
People were absolutely giving attitude towards people in Teslas in general, and Cybertrucks in particular, around the peak of all the DOGE nonsense. Still are, for Cybertrucks
27.
by gipp 8mo ago
And NYC. Just saw one this morning
28.
by gipp 9mo ago
> that the author offers no charitable reasons for why the experiment took place. Right, and neither did the GP. They both offered the exact same two reasons, the GP just apparently doesn't find them as repugnant as the author
29.
by gipp 9mo ago
> This feels forced, there are obvious and good reasons for running that experiment. Namely, learning how it fails and to generate some potentially viral content for investor relationship. The second one seems like an extremely good busi
30.
by gipp 9mo ago
I think we're using very different senses of "deterministic," and I'm not sure the one you're using is relevant to the discussion. Those proprietary blobs are either correct or not. If there are bugs, they fail in t

More ›