scratchee

The difference between LLMs and human intelligence is stark. But the difference between LLMs and other forms of computer intelligence is stark too (eg LLMs can’t do fairly basic maths, whereas computers have always been super intelligences in the calculator domain). It’s reasonable to assume that someone will figure out how to make an LLM that can integrate better with the rest of the computer sooner rather than later, and we don’t really know what that’ll look like. And that requires few new capabilities.

The reality is we don’t know how many steps between now and when we get AGI, some people before the big llm hype were insisting quality language processing was the key missing feature, now that looks a little naive, but we still don’t know exactly what’s missing. So better to plan ahead and maybe arrive early at solutions than wait until AGI has arrived and done something irreversible to start planning for it.

And android users are not obligated to give a good review after not receiving support.

I have no problem with his actions, (if he doesn’t have the resources/energy/time to support on all platforms, who can complain about that?), but I don’t think he’s very good at the whole communicating with other humans part of software that sadly in the OSS world tends to fall on the same devs that do the work, he could have avoided both this comment thread and the angry android user above with zero extra effort by simply phrasing things better.

The particular poor phrasing he chose seems to imply to me that he’s lumping all users of each platform together in his head, and each negative interaction builds on the previous, which isn’t the healthiest attitude, and does indeed make him look like an arsehole to anyone who’s just turned up and hasn’t yet done anything wrong.

Who said he was wrong? He basically guaranteed that android users will respond that way by refusing to support them, thus ensuring he will always be right about them

But removing them from the specific games they object to would not lose any more revenue than removing the games entirely, and reduce the backlash significantly, as long as they could find 1 obscure payment provider to handle the obscure games and keep some form of access.

“Safeguards and regulations make business less efficient” has always been true. They still avoid death and suffering.

In this case, if they can’t figure out how to control LLMs without crippling them, that’s pretty absolute proof that LLMs should not be used. What good is a tool you can’t control?

“I cannot regulate this nuclear plant without the power dropping, so I’ll just run it unregulated”.

Neither can humans, ergo nobody should ever be held liable for anything.

Civilisation is a sham, QED.

Neither of you are talking nonsense. The US clearly has a combination of problems that combine to cause their massive problem with mass shootings.

Their limited gun control is a contributing factor, but not the only factor. Other countries have weak gun laws and don’t have nearly the same problems, the US didn’t have the same problems in the past, they’ve grown worse over time, and at this point the very concept of mass shootings in media is a major cause of them.

Removing guns (magically removing all existing guns) would certainly reduce the problem and probably would eventually fix things, but at this point the US has been broiling itself in this idea for too long and it would probably continue with knives or homemade bombs or something instead, at least for a while.

And we’re equally disappointed in both of you for following our terrible example.

I’ve wondered before if someone could start an “uninsurance” company which makes the same deals with hospitals that insurance providers do, but charges its customers almost nothing and just lets the customer pay their deal price. I guess the hospitals would catch on and refuse to deal eventually…

But grandpa, how did you earn a sense of pride and accomplishment if you didn’t throw real money to the business men for every little thing you do?!

Around, of course!

The obvious limitation being that you can take a real photo with attestation with a real camera of a real computer screen displaying any fake shit you can imagine, then you have an officially hashed photo of anything.