izucken

6 ms·

1.
by izucken 26d ago
this guy f3s
2.
by izucken 3mo ago
The levels of irony here are peaking. - slop article that itself feels AI generated; - using a movie quote, like, from an actor and script and stuff; - a quote that itself is super smug and on the nose; - saying something so self evident ev
3.
by izucken 3mo ago
"How to protect AI" LOL humanity is fucking done.
4.
by izucken 3mo ago
human attention is all you need
5.
by izucken 3mo ago
Damn that goalposting issue is so easy to solve! See: - make another bullshit benchmark and name it "humanity's last humanlike intelligence benchmark" and overfit to it; - make rich talkinghead twit about it p r o f o u n
6.
by izucken 3mo ago
Absolutely. "non-Cliffordness" by consturction already implies "Cliffordness", which by construction implies "Clifford" and then connects other related things. Magic doesn't do that exactly, but instead sl
7.
by izucken 3mo ago
Should call the next big physics thing doubtscumbagium...
8.
by izucken 4mo ago
Essence of gacha games is predatory monetisation realised via fomo, drip feeding and sex - not numbers.
9.
by izucken 4mo ago
The point of all of that is to become god, straight up unironically.
10.
by izucken 4mo ago
Births is, sans miscalculation, a number that tracks exact events. Is the "capability" number on these LLM strengh graphs as tangible? I think it would be interesting to visit a reality that obeys arbitrary abstractions, but I wou
11.
by izucken 4mo ago
> It's not just impactful, it's consequential
12.
by izucken 5mo ago
Yeah but well you see, humans did not go extinct from just asbestos!
13.
by izucken 5mo ago
Unfathomable incident: arbitrary entity misusing its arbitrarily assigned unilateral power, following perverted incentives.
14.
by izucken 5mo ago
But then he wouldn't have a justification for AI companies to rob people! And you are suggesting robbing himself of this justification!
15.
by izucken 5mo ago
I should stop starring as a joke or as a bookmark...
16.
by izucken 5mo ago
Because elites hate you moreso than downtrodden (they love miserable people in a sense). You are an independent agent with your own ideas, worst case you are completely orthogonal to the hierarchy, and this is something that breaks the inte
17.
by izucken 6mo ago
Huh, casually flexing with a sentient pocket calculator!!!
18.
by izucken 6mo ago
Instruction from the user is clear: I should avoid testing on dummies and proceed straight to testing on humans.
19.
by izucken 6mo ago
Some parties wouldn't be thrilled about their "source available" getting cleaned this way. So when this gets completed it would only "clean" real open source that can't afford legal trouble. Satirically structu
20.
by izucken 7mo ago
I am bitter about this. Do you really with your mind and with your heart believe that: - LLMs are fundamentally fit for this type of comprehension - Misjudgements posted in this thread are "bugs", "errors" - Agents who c
21.
by izucken 7mo ago
I feel a sort of disappointment in how easily languages got swindled. There is seemingly no winning angle this time. This is the most doomed I've ever felt.
22.
by izucken 7mo ago
You've built an interesting statistic from gathering data across the project. The real answer: ai models and agentic apps make building spam tools more simple than ever. All you actually need is just some trivial api automation code.
23.
by izucken 7mo ago
This correlation you are observing is real.
24.
by izucken 7mo ago
At my current job I am in deep net LOC negative despite all new features... Somebody is getting fired and sued for stealing all these LOCs from the company...
25.
by izucken 7mo ago
The only "satisfying" answer to that for me is: "This question doesn't seem to make sense, could you clarify ...".
26.
by izucken 7mo ago
Tsk tsk thats adversarial prompting. Hostile even. And thats goalposting which is totally not cool, man.
27.
by izucken 8mo ago
You people clearly don't understand how important lines of code are. Three millions is a lot of lines of code even if its broken, and you can't even appreciate that number. Clearly you are weak software developers who write very l
28.
by izucken 2y ago
So it's much worse than I assumed from paper and repo overview? For further clarification: 1. See the issue example #14268 https://github.com/openai/SWELancer-Benchmark/tree/08b5d3dff... . It has a patch