lo_zamoyski

7 ms·

1.
by lo_zamoyski 4d ago
What I find interesting is how the tone seems to have changed in swathes of tech industry. Until LLMs were a thing, techno-optimism and sola technologia fundamentalism seems to have been a more prominent fetish. When LLMs began having a p
2.
by lo_zamoyski 4d ago
> It's a pejorative removed from it's historical context. It utterly depends on historical context. Intelligent people understand antonomasia and eponymy. > Actual Luddites and Pharisees would have not agreed that they were
3.
by lo_zamoyski 5d ago
Which is, of course, a bad thing that ought not to be encouraged and that ubiquity does, in fact, encourage and normalize.
4.
by lo_zamoyski 6d ago
The American situation is a real quagmire. The American auto lobby has spent nearly a century manipulating Americans and American culture by insinuating car ownership and transportation into what it means to be "American". The aut
5.
by lo_zamoyski 8d ago
> Terrence Tao, one of the most prominent mathematicians alive today, doesn't know math history? If Tao has a knowledge of the topic (which he does), then it isn't by virtue of being a mathematician per se, but by virtue of an
6.
by lo_zamoyski 8d ago
That's not the right word here, as Catholic dogmatic teaching does not enter into negotiation with what you might call competing doctrines. It doesn't blend bodies of doctrine like that. We're talking about adopting cultural
7.
by lo_zamoyski 8d ago
Right. The Church recognizes the principle of subsidiarity which is not coincidentally part of its social teaching. Modern media has allowed the pope to receive unceasing attention that the papacy never possessed historically, but what is
8.
by lo_zamoyski 8d ago
A factor, certainly, but culture, including the culture around education, are arguably bigger factors (which social media is also a vector for modifying; medium is the message and all that). Social and cultural expectations and conventions
9.
by lo_zamoyski 11d ago
Effective altruists concur.
10.
by lo_zamoyski 13d ago
Yes, Aristotle thought this about eels and certain kinds of mudfish or grey mullet, but he didn't maintain this about fish in general.
11.
by lo_zamoyski 13d ago
> Since no one had seen fish having sex, it was believed that fish spawned spontaneously from rivers/lakes/oceans and therefore were free from the animal version of "original sin". I don't know who comes up with
12.
by lo_zamoyski 14d ago
If I had more time, I might elaborate on the fact that both the author and those he criticizes are children of the Enlightenment. I mention this, because it has a great deal of relevance. Neither Promethean Techno-Pelagianism on the one han
13.
by lo_zamoyski 14d ago
> asking Claude which code snippet it prefers: the one it generated in a different chat, or one that I refactored [...] It always picks its own ...is not the same as claiming... > LLMs favor LLM-generated passages over human written o
14.
by lo_zamoyski 15d ago
> 'All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them' There are plenty of things that are difficult to understand that have been known by others for a long time. The point is that you d
15.
by lo_zamoyski 15d ago
> I think it's a mistake to attribute scientism to him. That would be good news, but this does make the article more - not less - confusing. If he doesn't lean toward scientism or adopt a view that, when worked out fully, resul
16.
by lo_zamoyski 16d ago
One must be careful about what is meant by "language" here, which is actually language expression . LLMs don't possess conceptual content. They only operate on language expression. Language as an internal conceptualization i
17.
by lo_zamoyski 16d ago
> what the point of doing research was if someone like Terence Tao could have figured out everything A similar question is now being asked: what is the point of doing research, etc. if something like AI can figure out everything? The que
18.
by lo_zamoyski 16d ago
Thomistic and Catholic intellectual tradition in general has long recognized this strange intellectual fragmentation which it does not itself suffer. It is not a matter of mere difference of temperament, because reality is what it is. One m
19.
by lo_zamoyski 18d ago
Which brings us to one of the earlier claims "I easily observe hundreds to thousands of bugs per week" which should be rewritten as "I easily observe hundreds to thousands of things that I consider to be bugs per week"
20.
by lo_zamoyski 21d ago
In common English, I would say that "average" as used in the quote is understood to be something closer to mode, hence why the joke works, because it trades on the ambiguity of "average" and the difference between mode a
21.
by lo_zamoyski 21d ago
Not quite. Rhetoric is persuasion under the presupposition that what you are trying to persuade someone of is true. Sophistry is indifferent to the truth and is merely concerned with results. Rhetoric respects the humanity of the interlocut
22.
by lo_zamoyski 22d ago
> what if we took nice things from our country and subsidized distributing them to the rest of the world Or the appearance of nice things. Consider the suburb as promoted by American film which has left a very deep mark on the global i
23.
by lo_zamoyski 29d ago
But this also means there’s more competition for attention, because now all lunatics can post from their bedrooms. The institutional media (including legacy) still maintain strong presence. Of course, a great deal of panic over fake news wa
24.
by lo_zamoyski 1mo ago
> Who decide The law already concerns itself with determining intent (hence murder vs. manslaughter). I don’t see why similar criteria and methods cannot be applied here. We can assess the objectively bad psychological consequences of so
25.
by lo_zamoyski 1mo ago
> There is no single effect of AI on work quality. Depends on use and effort. Quoting the article... "Nearly half of senior leaders say they would trust a chatbot’s judgment over their own, on questions they were hired to answer.&qu
26.
by lo_zamoyski 1mo ago
I didn't say being phony is a benefit. I was (in my view) charitably giving the author the benefit of the doubt by assuming that his vulgarity is feigned (posturing) and not ingrained and habitual.
27.
by lo_zamoyski 1mo ago
Thanks for your response. > I didn’t make that claim in any implied way, I asserted, correctly, that Aristotle is not an Abrahamic thinker. I was trying to make sense of what your two disconnected sentences were saying and used this as a
28.
by lo_zamoyski 1mo ago
What an obnoxious post. Pro-tip: knock off the vulgarity and avoid making ignorant remarks that pander to presently fashionable sentiments. It doesn't "spice up" your text or make it more "fun" or "real",
29.
by lo_zamoyski 1mo ago
> How can we possibly make use of these breakthroughs if we don’t understand them? How could we ever make anything useful with them? Theoretical science isn't about usefulness per se, but knowledge and understanding for its own sake
30.
by lo_zamoyski 1mo ago
It's a category mistake. People try to naturalize Jesus as a "great teacher", but the one thing you cannot do is frame Jesus as another wise man and good teacher! The man claimed to be God. Anyone who makes a claim like is ei

More ›