@ChickenOverlord's banner p

ChickenOverlord


				

				

				
1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 22:31:16 UTC

				

User ID: 218

ChickenOverlord


				
				
				

				
1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 22:31:16 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 218

Did you ever try my suggestions under your last fud post?

Came down with a cold, missed work for several days, and forgot. Sorry! I'll try to remember this week.

Iran has been under attack or occupation since 1941.

Only for very idiosyncratic definitions of "under attack" and "occupied".

Sure, but they're on track to burn $11 billion this year in expenses, and more in the future, so that's not going to last too long

Annoyance at AI mandates from above? At insufferable people shoving AI slop in your face at every opportunity? Just disliking the concept in general?

All of the above, honestly? But the biggest would be annoyance at mandates from above, combined with a completely reversal in what people consider quality engineering in software that magically coincides with the rise in popularity of AI tools. See Lines of Code suddenly becoming a positive metric for a lot of people, versus the old Bill Gates quote "Measuring programming progress by lines of code is like measuring aircraft building progress by weight."

The tech industry hype cycle goes on and on, at some point people went crazy over Java of all things, now it’s just a boring programming language and you don’t have to be a “Java believer” to use it.

Sure, but despite Java's warts it's still used to this day to make a lot of the important software that keeps the modern world running. The AI hype bubble is much more reminiscent of the crypto bubble. No matter how many times you tried to make it clear that crypto is only useful where you need a distributed, immutable, trustless ledger (and even then it's questionable), crypto bros kept proposing uses in situations where trust was still required and other existing tools already did an infinitely better job for far less computing power. Similarly, I see retarded things like "I had AI generate a thing, and then I had another AI review it and tell me it looked great! What, review it myself? No, of course not, why would I do that?"

Opus made you burn tokens quickly so you switched, but when these people also use Opus and burn tokens quick it's because they're using it wrong?

I think you misunderstand my argument. I'm not arguing that AGI is impossible based on this (though I don't believe it's possible). I'm arguing that this is a strong sign that VC money is drying up before they could ever conceivably achieve AGI (even if it is possible).

Another indicator that AI is a bubble. Anthropic just released Claude Opus 4.7, and users are reporting significantly higher token burn rates (and therefore costs) for what appears to be a minor improvement over Opus 4.6. Discussion on Orange Reddit is here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47816960 and a tracker of the increased token burn rate is here: https://tokens.billchambers.me/leaderboard

The token tracker is based on user reporting, but has been fluctuating between 37% and 45%.

Even if AGI is actually possible with LLMs (or at all, but I'm not trying to start a discussion on metaphysics here), it looks like the capital needed to achieve it is drying up before it can be reached. Anthropic's move here (combined with them handicapping Opus 4.6 a few weeks ago) seems to clearly be an attempt to achieve profitability. The free/subsidized rate train for end users has pulled into the station, and now you have to pay more for the same (or worse) capabilities you were enjoying before.

I normally don't care much for the median Hacker News commenter (if me calling it Orange Reddit didn't already give that away), but I do find them to be a useful barometer for general sentiment in the tech industry. And a few months ago I would have said roughly 60% of HN users were AI believers/enthusiasts, 20% neutral or unsure, and 20% anti/negative. Anthropic's antics over the last few months (and Sam Altman's antics for his entire life) seem to have soured their views significantly, and I see this as a big sign of a sea change in sentiment about AI in the tech industry.

At least for me personally, I just hope this leads to less retarded mandates from my higher-ups about using AI X times a month etc. (we're literally tracked on usage and it can affect our raises/bonuses).

For everyone here, nut perhaps especially the AGI believers, have your feelings changed at all over the last few months?

Honestly, if China wasn't run by Godless Communists, I'd have far fewer issues with them competing against America economically (or otherwise). Not to say there would be zero concern about those things, for example I don't like US manufacturing being hollowed out by Chinese competition, but the overwhelming weight of my concerns about China are the ends they are using their economy and political and military and cultural influence towards.

I like the first 2.5 seasons of AoT. Season 4 was awful, not just because of where the story went, but because they decided to switch to weird rotoscoped 3D models instead of traditional animation, and the music was terrible too. But I hated the idea of genociding 80% of the world's population, and Zeke's sterilization idea, and just about everything from the Marleyans' perspective.

LLMs aren't needed for that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_search

And that sort of 2010 era AI only needs a decent GPU to run (if even), not massive datacenters dedicated to it.

The Republicans have been putting forward milquetoast RINOs for decades, and I (and most Republicans, though for the record I'm not a Republican I'm a member of the Constitution Party) grew tired enough of it that they didn't trust any establishment candidate the GOP put forward.

The baby is violating my bodily autonomy, me removing them from MY body does not violate their bodily autonomy.

You generally can't remove a baby without violating their bodily autonomy. Most abortions involve essentially blending the baby up and scraping them out.

Pro-lifer's want to assign more moral weight to a baby than to a human, but I have yet to hear a compelling reason for it.

I don't see how I will ever consider a "child" (even granting a clump of cells is a child) of more moral worth than an existing human being

That's just straight up weird, children have been almost universally considered to be of greater moral worth than adults for all of human history. Even animals are often willing to endanger or sacrifice themselves for the sake of children. Even from an atheistic and evolutionary point of view, ensuring the safety and well-being of children (over that of adults) is essential to the perpetuation of the species. Children are innocent (this was discussed more thoroughly by someone else in this thread), and innocent people have greater moral worth than those who are guilty of wrongdoing (and all adults have done some amount of wrongdoing, some more than others). The same way a serial killer adult has less moral worth than a non-serial killer adult. I don't see any way to see this differently without completely throwing out the idea that morality exists.

For similar levels of effort I'd like you to address how you can be pro-life yet not immediately donate your body and all your organs to help everyone who needs organ transplants. After all if bodily autonomy is not sacrosanct, and some humans have more moral worth than others, shouldn't we forcibly remove organs to help those of more moral virtue?

Because I'm not a utilitarian? Only utilitarian ethics (and similar deranged branches of ethics) would reach the conclusions you're suggesting. Just because all human life has inherent value but some are more valuable than others doesn't mean any and all measures to save the life of another are mandated. But there is nothing incompatible with this view and the view that we should not take active measures (like abortion) to end an innocent life.

Another factor (technically fits under deluge I guess?): widespread access to pornography leading to men seeing lots of dicks which desensitized their natural disgust reaction to another man's dick having sex.

d argue that holding someone against their will for no reason other than you can is wrong

Sure, but law enforcement/prison (usually) isn't a "just because we can" thing. Similar to how many people oppose murdering babies (which, by the way, violates their bodily autonomy) "just because we can". I.e. when "it's inconvenient for my lifestyle and/or the baby will have Down's Syndrome or similar" which accounts for roughly 95% of abortions. I'm personally a pro-life absolutist who opposes it even in danger to the life of the mother type situations (though I've grown into that position over time, I sadly used to be more "moderate" in my support of child murder), but for the modal abortion it's essentially done out of convenience, not necessity.

Any Trump supporters care to steelman this?

I don't like it, and I'm disgusted by it, but he's still a better pick than Kamala or anyone else the Dems have (or theoretically might) put forward as a candidate on any and all issues I care about. So yeah, the Dems are still so awful that Trump can blaspheme Christ and he's still better than the opposition ("Hey Jamie, pull up that clip of God being booed at the DNC").

Trump doesn't support the mass importation of Muslims and Hindus, though he definitely is only doing token opposition to things like H1B visas where it would really make a dent in stopping them. And yet I can't imagine the Dems doing anything other than increasing the amount of Muslims and Indians coming in.

So yeah, Trump is far from perfect, but he still manages to better serve my interests as both a Christian and an American than the opposition.

"My Body" is always my body, morally it is wrong to remove bodily autonomy from a being regardless of the reason.

Do you support abolishing prison? Or law enforcement entirely, since almost all criminal law enforcement requires taking people's bodies and holding them against their will (and threatening them with bodily harm if they don't comply)? I can't think of any moral framework that includes absolute bodily autonomy without resulting in absurd results in all other walks of life. And we're not talking about weird edge cases here, we're talking about normal things a society needs in order to function.

I mean there's nothing keeping you from making one. WinCo is the biggest one in the US that I'm aware of, and Mondragon in Spain is pretty sizeable too.

However my favorite example of commies deciding they don't like having to share the means of production is when the creators of the game Dead Cells started out as a co-op, but after they hit it big they created a wholly owned (non-co-op) subsidiary to hire all the new developers and other talent they needed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Twin

Motion Twin was founded in 2001 as a private limited company in France. In 2004, it became a worker cooperative with equal salary and decision-making power between its members. The name Motion Twin refers to an animation technique, called motion tween, and the red star in the logo was chosen due to its revolutionary connotations.

...

In 2019, Motion Twin assisted in the establishment of Evil Empire to take over development and support of Dead Cells, allowing other Motion Twin developers to start on their next project. Evil Empire is run by Steve Filby, Motion Twin's former head of marketing, and is not a cooperative, since the company wanted to scale beyond ten employees. Motion Twin continues to maintain creative control over Evil Empire's work on Dead Cells."

Suggest he become a JAG, best of both worlds and his chances of getting KIA are near zero. And I think they'll pay off his law school student loans if he stays with it for a decade or something like that.

Elon musk might have alot of haters, but he has a ton of rabid superfans going to war on the internet trying to squash anything negative about him.

Sam Hyde's Dear Elon video goes into this quite a bit. Right-wingers don't care that he's a weirdo obsessed with electric cars and who has tons of children he doesn't actually raise with a dozen different women. So long as he is willing to side with us on the core issues we care about (like immigration) or at least not be actively hostile against it (like he seems to be with religion), the right is willing to accept and love him, warts and all. It's when he sided with Vivek Ramaswamy's overtly anti-white and anti-American views on immigration that a lot of the love the right was showing for him evaporated overnight.

Personally I've never loved (nor hated) Elon, I've always seen him as a rich, sometimes entertaining weirdo who finally fixed the space industry. But his interests aren't mine, and never have been. When our interests align I'll gladly accept the help, but I will never expect him to be a reliable ally.

You could have just quoted the lyrics to We Didn't Start the Fire to save yourself some typing.

Law hasn't been a great field for a while either. Source: I'm a law school dropout.

Around the time of the 2008 financial crisis, tons of universities added law schools. They basically bring in the same amount of revenue as medical schools, but with waaaaay less overhead. The legal job market got flooded in the mid 10's. I'm sure supply and demand have normalized a bit since then, but law isn't nearly as surefire a way to be wealthy as it used too be.

Maybe this belongs in the small questions thread, but how does Iran unilaterally restrict access to the strait without Oman's buy-in as well (at least without effectively performing an act of war against Oman)? Also is there anyone here familiar with international maritime law (and preferably not of the sovereign citizen, "how dare you stop me while I travel in my vessel, officer" types) who knows what rules exist (if any) about allowing access to the high seas from territorial waters that are otherwise "trapped" by another country's territorial waters, like Kuwait and Saudi Arabia currently are?

https://preview.redd.it/t8si5jmaw9pg1.jpeg?width=646&auto=webp&s=6f8a203626ed9fda42160a04d358b04f7c528b7d - The text with the white background is the lovely work of the "localizers"

https://i.redd.it/qm0ypm1csz3b1.png - Literalish translation would be "Crap! Why did I have to babble on about some weird fashion theory to a pro model of all people!?"

And over 20 examples are provided in this Twitter thread: https://x.com/BoundingComics/status/1741000080889720927

Also for an example of a localizer doing an amazing job and trying to be true to the source material is the fan translation of Mother 3 (AKA Earthbound 2): https://mother3.fobby.net/ https://youtube.com/watch?v=WjMllYgUOeU

You have to address the arguments made by people, not the person.

It's more than just arguments, it's evidence and what sources they cite. If someone is constantly citing the Weekly World News as their proof that Bat Boy exists (or worse, is straight up lying or making up their own fake evidence), it doesn't matter how good their arguments are for why Bat Boy is real. There have been tons of lies on all sides of the Ukraine war, and I'm extremely skeptical of any of the Youtubers that regularly comment on the war because of the amount of sheer lies many of them have peddled.