intended

6 ms·

1.
by intended 3d ago
These situations are novel. Lax terminology is fine when it has no impact on the intuitions, clarity and conclucions of discussion. If this was a conversation just about outcomes, then whether models think or simulate thinking is sophistry.
2.
by intended 4d ago
>but It no longer makes economic sense to write all the code by hand, so increasingly I don’t. and > There are good developers, mediocre developers, and bad developers, and the good ones are still hard to find. move in opposite direct
3.
by intended 4d ago
We have a ways to go before we hit zero, since we are inventing entire new ways to be a prick. I think we are a year or so away from the first tik toks of humanoid robots walking up to people and punching them for views.
4.
by intended 4d ago
The fact that it is autocomplete, doesn't dismiss or minimize the threat though? I am not sure how that link was made. Good old ML, which is significantly simpler than LLMs, was capable of ensuring people would not be hired simply beca
5.
by intended 5d ago
This is the perfect fracture point for both anaolgies. LLMs simulated more than simple autocomplete. The autocomplete analogy is rebutting a different point: namely the fidelity of the simulation to reality. This specific argument is valid.
6.
by intended 5d ago
I can say with some certainty that you should most definitely bother. The greatest predictor of AI productivity I have seen has been operator maturity. AI usage tends to atrophy skills, unless used in a very mature and self aware manner. Al
7.
by intended 7d ago
AI productivity discussion go! The model seems defensible, but for some reason it isn’t passing the sniff test. Maybe its that the extreme scenario seems wildly optimistic, or that the observed modest productivity gains are framed as either
8.
by intended 8d ago
The more I see of frontier lab economics, the less it seems like the earlier predictions on how they will grow hold. This imbroglio looks like a point in the journey for a firm that is realizing it is not going to make money selling shovels
9.
by intended 8d ago
Not disagreeing with the post- wouldn’t this come under the category of “everything is bad for users when the corporations become too big”?
10.
by intended 8d ago
But Boeing and Airbus kept desiging and building new and improved planes. There are multiple aircraft manufacturers for smaller aircraft, and there are several showing up for electric aircraft today. For jets, the capex required to build th
11.
by intended 8d ago
> Actually, in the real world, the worst markets are also the strongest regulated: housing, education and health care. > Meanwhile the fields that got to be regulated last brought us the most wealth, advances and innovation: high tech
12.
by intended 8d ago
That... that is not exactly how things work. The choices you are presented with, are always a function of market structure, aka the interplay of incentives, regulation, and competition. You have a market because your taxes pay for many th
13.
by intended 8d ago
You are focusing on deception as a category of malice and intentional behavior. For arguments sake, let’s assume two people watch an event and found religions based on their perception of it. This is purely a matter of belief, based on what
14.
by intended 9d ago
Yes. This is always going to be the case, because regulation is typically a form of friction. It is the shape of regulation that matters, and ideology on either side of the divide is religion. Good regulation and regulators would punish ant
15.
by intended 9d ago
It bears repeating - all markets get regulated. Markets, left to their own devices, do not end up automatically being competitive in favor of consumers. But above all, if AI wasn’t hyped as a threat to humanity, to jobs, to security, regula
16.
by intended 9d ago
The shortest path answer is a bit too caveman-esque to survive its application to reality. That said, I think there is a lot of appeal to go hunting for firms, since it really feels like corporations and their owners are engaging in predato
17.
by intended 10d ago
Eh… No. I get the appeal, but lying is a sub-category of deception, and deception itself is a child of error. Meaning deception is inherently something that the physics of reality allows. In the most simplistic sense, the camouflage of moth
18.
by intended 10d ago
I agree my tone could have been better.
19.
by intended 10d ago
I have heard that sentiment many times already. It's a statement that is broad enough to capture any benefit and disavow any costs, for some later day when one can choose the nature of their measurement. How would you estimate actual g
20.
by intended 10d ago
> I disagree with this take so strongly You are free to disagree, and you are free to have an opinion. I would prefer your position to be the one that dominates, however the data on the ground doesn’t support the position. If I can make
21.
by intended 10d ago
> - the knights are just now starting to realize that proficiency with a sword and 70kg of armor are no match for a peasant with a pistol This isn’t a metaphor/analogy that works. There is a parallel in the introduction of a tool th
22.
by intended 10d ago
It is slightly dismissive, since we see degradation of literacy within the past 20 years. https://literacytrust.org.uk/research-services/research-repo... We also know from colleges and schools that students coming in
23.
by intended 11d ago
No. As I said clearly, I haven’t made any point on the computational substrate. The point is on the computation being run. I dont need to bother about free will for my argument. Please take a look at what I am saying as it has little overla
24.
by intended 11d ago
Thats an interesting subsection, and I wouldn't say it agrees fully with either position. It both acknowledges the option of using simulations, and the weaknesses inherent in it being unable to simulate unknown unknowns.
25.
by intended 11d ago
The article proposes a resolution based on the challenge and evidence they (correctly) identify at the start. The simulation solution is backed by their own applied example, and is also the logical intervention based on how the problem is s
26.
by intended 11d ago
The difference between the two is that friction is learning. the less friction the less growth. So even if they copied from SO they would have better knowledge than an Ai user. This isn’t speculation either, theres an MIT study which this
27.
by intended 11d ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironies_of_Automation https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/000510... The article is based on evidence, and states it clearly in the bo
28.
by intended 11d ago
If you are in a situation where you dont know what happened when something goes wrong, the business incentives will not accept “its too complex” as an answer. Firms aren’t just selling products, they are selling reliability and taking on li
29.
by intended 11d ago
We already know this happens though, Bainbridge’s paper came out in 1983.
30.
by intended 12d ago
Ironies of Automation is front and center in this article which is awesome. Many of the conversations on AI automation are describing or rediscovering the insights the paper covered.

More ›