You can't spit it out after you already swallowed it! And the ones I'm used to don't make any sort of hard shell, they simply wiggle their way into the fruit.
Not that it's a big deal - if they caused any harm, I'd be dead already.
That's Hacker News in a nutshell.
o rly.
These people were using ✨agentic✨ AI. They were using ✨thinking✨ models
The A"I" industry is full of those misleading buzzwords, isn't it?
"Agentic" would be theoretically "able to take decisions by itself, like an agent", but in practice the word is spammed so often in this context that it lost its meaning.
"Thinking"? Look, you can push and pull definitions as much as you want, but those models don't think. Nor do people who claim otherwise.
So are the AI-posters lying or what?
I think the AI-posters are a mix of the following, in order of least to most malevolent: Outright Malice\
Stop trying to gauge "intentions" (whatever this means). Focus on the fact that they're vomiting certainty on something that is blatantly incorrect.
Eventually every vibe coder reaches the point where the returns start heavily diminishing.
From my experience as translator, translating things is easier than proofreading. I expect the same to apply to code - writing code to be easier than reviewing and maintaining it. (What programmers in Lemmy often say reinforce this for me.)
What if I'm my own why-foo?
I wonder if that isn't a protection against mould reaching the seeds.
Yup! The ones in guava are bigger though, far more visible, and people always joke the worst part isn't finding a worm there, but half a worm. (Just a wee bit of protein~)
Anyone who eats guava straight from the tree probably ate far more maggots through their life than any H. neanderthalensis did. Including myself.
...damn, I miss that guava tree.
Interesting… I hadn’t considered that this might enable linguistic “shorthands”, is that the implication?
Yes, it is! Agreement on its own already allows some "shorthands", if you're able to omit the nouns; but derivation in special allows a lot of them, because it allows you to cram more info into the word at the "cost" of 1~3 phonemes.
I'll give you some examples of that, using Portuguese for my own convenience; do note however you'll see similar stuff popping up in other gendered languages.
First example:
1a. O relógio (M) caiu sobre a mesa (F), e ele (M) quebrou.
1b. O relógio (M) caiu sobre a mesa (F), e ela (F) quebrou.
Both sentences mean "the clock fell over the table, and it broke", but the "ele" (he/it) in 1a refers to the clock, and the "ela" (she/it) in 1b to the table. By changing the gender of the pronoun, you can force it to refer to one or another noun, in a rather succinct way you wouldn't be able to do in a non-gendered language like English. (I feel like "it" would refer to the clock, as the agent of the first phrase, and if you want to refer to the table breaking you'd need to repeat the noun.)
Of course, this "shorthand" only works if both nouns happen to have different genders, but it's already enough to cram a bit more info per syllable. In other cases people use the same strategies as in English.
Second example:
2. Pedro tem dois gatos: uma (F) frajola (F or M) e um (M) malhado (M).
Translated directly, this sentence becomes "Peter has two cats: a tuxedo and a tabby". However the translation doesn't mention the tuxedo is a female, and the tabby a male. In a non-gendered language you'd need to either ditch those pieces of info or explicitly refer to them, and that takes more words.
I’d be interested in follow up studies to examine emergent linguistic patterns. Can we weigh syllabic encoding by common usage by age? If we eliminate “thouest” from the dictionary but include “skibidi” how does that skew patterns for informational density?
The impact for an individual word would be fairly minimal, I think. However, if you're systematically changing sounds or the grammar, like languages often do (cue to "want to", "going to", "trying to" → "wanna", "gonna", "tryna"), the impact will be fairly high. And likely compensated elsewhere, to keep the bits/second ratio roughly the same.
Science is so fucking cool and I’m stoked that people nerd out on shit that I’m an idiot about so I can learn about the nature of the world.
And the fun part is that everybody is an idiot for most topics, except a few individual expertises. We're basically a race of clueless apes trying to make sense of the world.
Relevant to note that, if you ask 1000 people how they split media genres, you'll get 1000 different answers. There's no "true" answer, and making a list that encompasses all genres is impossible.
That said I feel like this video should be a good intro for people who aren't into anime yet.
I think we should all burn an effigy in commitment to safe microwaves ovens.
Also, just because a syllable “encodes more bits on average” does it imply faster transmission rate?
If by "faster" you're measuring:
- the transmission per syllable - then yes
- the transmission per second - then no
This is easier to see in the original paper than in the OP. Check page 3; the second column is the rate of transmission per second, it's roughly 35~45 bits/s for all of them.
Just because French encodes gender information into it’s language and syllables, isn’t knowing the gender of a shovel at best “check bits?” Used for detecting transmission errors but not intrinsically critical data?
At least in theory, redundancy required by [gender, number, case, etc.] agreement shouldn't count, as it isn't adding new information - it's only repeating info already provided. In practice it's hard to model this, so the numbers for gendered languages might be a bit overestimated.
Note however gender has a second role, besides agreement: derivation. Derivation should actually increase bits/second, since it allows you to convey succinctly some stuff.
I’m fascinated by the assertion that it’s easy to establish “bits per second” on syllables having somehow abstracted away social context.
The social context (and the context, as a whole) plays a huge role on that, as paralinguistic information. However the scope there is only the linguistic info, encoded by the language itself.
24
Linguistic evidence suggests that the Xiōng-Nú and the Huns spoke the same Paleo-Siberian language
(onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
97
New Hittite Tablet Shows Striking Correspondences with the Narrative of Homer's Iliad
(www.thearchaeologist.org)
15
You Might Think of Shrimp as Bugs of the Sea: But Bugs Are Shrimp of the Land
(www.smithsonianmag.com)
view more: next ›
Remember Torvalds flipping the bird, and telling a corporation to fuck itself? That was NVidia. And that was why he did it.
(I had NVidia GPUs through my whole life, except the last one - an AMD. I'm glad to have switched.)
Anyway, meldrik's answer should work fine.