wendgeabos

6 ms·

1.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
I have reached the same conclusion -- this is perhaps not a distraction but an attempt to gather funds to pursue the One True Goal...
2.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
Consider: If you genuinely believe that the only important goal is to make life multiplanetary, (and note I'm not defending this position here, just asserting it as an explanation of behavior) then anything that drives money towards
3.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
I love thinking hard, it's genuinely my favorite thing, but ... we get paid to ship.
4.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
What is the question you are asking? What does "useful" mean, in other words? How does it contribute to the reproductive success of the offspring?
5.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
OK.
6.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
So, is claude code really better than codex with latest gpt model, or do people just hate on openai so much that no one (but me apparently) is using them? I am asking this question seriously because if so I will make the switch, but codex
7.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
I do, and I have. Whereof man cannot speak, thereof he must pass over in silence, to which I say, pbthbptltpt! I hold with the primacy of doubt fer shure.
8.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
I worked with Lee Sword (also RIP) for a while; he was on the mechanical team for Sojourner. Interesting guy.
9.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
If y'all haven't read the Henghis Hapthorn stories by Matthew Hughes e.g. The Gist Hunter and Other Tales iirc, you should check them out. This is a cut at Henghis' "Integrator" assistant.
10.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
yes. It also keeps the pasta from sticking together as quickly after you drain it. But an Italian friend made a face and said "it will keep the sauce from adhering to the pasta!!!' so... yeah.
11.
Codex Daily Benchmarks for Degradation Tracking (Marginlab.ai)(marginlab.ai)
1 points by wendgeabos 8mo ago|0 comments
12.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
Codex is doing better. Why is everyone silent on Codex? https://marginlab.ai/trackers/codex/
13.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
manus, mens et. one each.
14.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
This needs to be mashed up with the Daxophone. Like, can I clamp pieces of wood into it and bow them?
15.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
#applauseguy
16.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
The title makes me disinclined to read the whole paper. But I guess that's AI destroying institutions. Sigh. Social science != science.
17.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
It would be good to see evidence to support the claims: NanoLang solves three problems: LLM Code Generation - Unambiguous syntax reduces AI errors Testing Discipline - Mandatory tests improve code quality particularly the first.
18.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
I saw this and thought, Nomic for Normies
19.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
Oh interesting. Thanks!
20.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
Old man asks: Does this support what the kids call "livecoding"?
21.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
It's hard to imagine how it could not have driven human evolution as well.
22.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
huh so that's a way that it's adaptive for the animals
23.
by wendgeabos 8mo ago
pain when meditating? huh?
24.
by wendgeabos 9mo ago
How does it determine task complexity? Or is this a parameter the user passes in?
25.
by wendgeabos 9mo ago
almost certain to be uneconomical.
26.
by wendgeabos 9mo ago
The government is everywhere prone to becoming the mafia.
27.
by wendgeabos 9mo ago
anecdata
28.
by wendgeabos 9mo ago
The OP confuses "inevitable" with "totalizing" in part. Many bad things seem likely to be adopted by large numbers of people, and yet that does not mean everyone will be somehow forced into adopting these things.