scarmig

9 ms·

1.
by scarmig 5d ago
The dominant opinion on HN is, apparently, "It's been a full four days since OpenAI resolved Navier-Stokes, they must be hitting a wall."
2.
by scarmig 14d ago
Note that Caplan is focusing on medians and percentiles in his table, not on means.
3.
by scarmig 14d ago
I do kind of get the point that ensuring Boomers who have a lot of wealth in real estate can pass a paid off house to their heirs isn't a socially valuable goal (especially since Social Security is funded by working people, including m
4.
by scarmig 15d ago
Reading through them, Luu's grades seem fair and accurate to me. Best defense of Kurzweil I can give is that if you give a grace period of a decade and scope them down substantially (to maybe a subset of well-off Americans in coastal c
5.
by scarmig 15d ago
But even those concessions have been a shift: at every point, he's been as bearish as possible on LLMs, often past credibility. And if you take it as a given that AI will never be any better than ~~now~~ a year ago, and that anyone who
6.
by scarmig 15d ago
Still a flaw--the SVG should account for how different client devices will render it! Existential doom averted, for now.
7.
by scarmig 24d ago
That's a pretty crass attempt to shift the burden of proof. You're stating that LLMs are definitively not conscious and never could be; I'm saying we should approach the question with a sense of humility and agnosticism since
8.
by scarmig 24d ago
Why? What makes you so absolutely certain? 100% is a lot, which implies you do have at least some privileged understanding of consciousness.
9.
by scarmig 24d ago
My argument isn't that current AI is definitively conscious or that it will be in the short term. It's that nobody has a cohesive theory of consciousness, and that we should therefore approach questions of what's conscious an
10.
by scarmig 24d ago
No one understands these things, which is why considering machine consciousness as a possibility is entirely reasonable. People who have a shallow model of how they work ("it's just linear algebra!") betray a lack of unders
11.
by scarmig 27d ago
Unfortunately, that's not the case in the United States. The LOC only selects around half of published books to be permanently held. The rest are disposed of (usually returning them to the publisher, donating them to a library, or dest
12.
by scarmig 27d ago
The magical library in the countryside, to be painfully explicit, does not exist.
13.
by scarmig 27d ago
Is your complaint that they follow copyright law, or that they don't follow copyright law?
14.
by scarmig 27d ago
Dumpsters also don't typically come equipped with a robot scanner and network uplink built in. Like, I really don't know what people objecting to this imagine typically happens to old, unwanted books. They don't get sent to s
15.
by scarmig 27d ago
Relinquishing copyright does not imply any of the labor you're suggesting. It's the opposite: you're just committing not to perform the labor of pursuing legal action against someone who does digitize and freely distribute th
16.
by scarmig 27d ago
You've got to compare it to the alternative. Books have a half-life, and the vast majority of these books being purchased are grody, moldering ex-lib copies of books that no one has read in decades. Their other likely outcome is mulchi
17.
by scarmig 27d ago
The hypothetical "heroic figure goes and buys last copy of a 1962 guide to Ford cars to carefully maintain it in an appropriately climate controlled library" is vanishingly unlikely. A ten or a hundred or a thousand times to one,
18.
by scarmig 28d ago
Yes. Otherwise, you open the door for every criminal to use "oopsie" as their defense.
19.
by scarmig 29d ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Look_Up A movie fit for our time. You can produce detailed descriptions of the incident, verified by adversarial parties, and some people will still scream "it's a conspi
20.
by scarmig 29d ago
California and Arizona use literally orders of magnitude more water for alfalfa farming than they do for data centers.
21.
by scarmig 29d ago
> we shouldn't be building these heat generating facilitates Jesus.
22.
by scarmig 29d ago
California's biggest problems are mostly along the lines of "too many people want to live here." I have plenty of complaints about California governance, many of them conservative coded. But if California is a failed state,
23.
by scarmig 1mo ago
So, what you're asking for is an example of someone extracting value out of something that is fundamentally irreducible random noise?
24.
by scarmig 1mo ago
There are plenty of artifacts that, if not impossible for humans to understand, then at least no human has ever completely understood. To start with, the universe as a whole. Despite that, we are able to choose legible pieces of it to model
25.
by scarmig 1mo ago
Take something like (1+x*y)^3*z+y^2*(1+x*y)*(4+3*x*y);y+3*x*(1+x*y)^2*z+3*x*y^2*(4+3*x*y);2*x-3*x^2*y-x^3*z|0,0,-1/4|1,-3/2,13/2 If a thousand monkeys typed at a character per second, on a keyboard with the 23 relevant
26.
by scarmig 1mo ago
> Because one day Ed will be right Bold prediction.
27.
Award Winning AI Literature(jamesyu.org)
2 points by scarmig 1mo ago|0 comments
28.
by scarmig 1mo ago
Whatever the morality involved, it's an unstable norm. There can be good actors who use AI and disclose, and good actors who don't use AI and don't disclose. There are bad actors, however, who will use AI and not disclose. Th
29.
by scarmig 1mo ago
Imagine you've got to evacuate a hundred thousand people. That extra day is incredibly valuable.
30.
by scarmig 1mo ago
"The fire fighting department really just hired an arsonist so they could market their fire fighting abilities!"

More ›