SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
No bio...
User ID: 225

IMO the best way to keep Discord pleasant is to not join public servers. It works best for small groups of people who know each other, like an MMO guild or similar groups of friends. I've joined large public servers before and they are kind of miserable.
My point is not that the problems are unsolvable (jury's out on that), it's that "this will be good if we can fix the problems" isn't a very meaningful statement. Everything is good if you can fix the problems with it!
Sure, I would agree that the government has come largely (some would argue entirely) unmoored from the will of the people. And I certainly agree that politicians continually act in unprincipled ways. Perhaps I misunderstood you as referring to all people rather than just politics.
I never have, but that's still really awesome! Congrats!
I honestly can't relate to people who complain about not-dark mode. I don't find it hard on the eyes at all, so it's difficult for me to understand how anyone could be so fervently bothered by it. To each their own I suppose.
It's way easier to have a wife. And yeah a lot of guys complain about theirs, but that's generally venting about minor grievances rather than a serious complaint. In truth, most of those guys would be miserable without their wives, and they probably know it.
While I'm not a lawyer, I don't see how there could be any such retroactive action, considering the constitution explicitly forbids ex post facto laws. Presumably even if we do get rid of birthright citizenship, it would apply only to future cases, not past cases.
But he wouldn't be the legitimate ruler in this case, because he can't be. I don't deny that there's a group of people who are so fanatical about Trump that they will follow him no matter what he does. But it's not enough to get him re-elected.
+1 on the marijuana thing. In principle, I want it to be legal to smoke weed because it's not my business what people do to their bodies. But in practice, it turns out that legal weed emboldens a bunch of jerks who think it's ok to smoke absolutely everywhere, so that I can hardly drive around my city (Denver) sometimes without having to smell their foul-smelling weed. I'm to the point that I would rather make it illegal again, which I know sucks for people who act reasonably. But I don't see how else we can make it so that the unreasonable folks don't get to make everything smell like weed.
I disagree. Like I said, I thought book 4 was excellent (I would say it's my second favorite behind Words of Radiance). Which is why I'm saying there isn't really agreement on this point, so it would be more accurate to advise new readers "I don't really care for the books after this point, but many people still like them, so you may or may not find it enjoyable".
Strongly disagree. Going that fast compared to traffic is way more dangerous than going normal speed (which is anywhere with 5mph of the speed limit in my experience).
Sorry, I genuinely can't understand what your point is. I'm guessing because I don't work in finance so I'm missing a reference. Can you please clarify?
If you are decently competent programmer working in an industry where things like accuracy, precision, and security are core concerns, LLMs start to look anti-productive as in the time you spent messing around with prompts, checking the LLM's work, and correcting it's errors, you could've easily done the work yourself.
I think this fairly nicely summarizes how I feel. Not that I do work in one of those industries to be fair, but it's part of my personal work ethic I guess you might say. I want computers (and programs) to be correct first and foremost. Speed or ease of development don't mean much to me if the result can't be relied upon. Not only that, I want my tools to be correct first and foremost. I wouldn't accept a hammer where the head randomly fell off the handle 10% of the time or even 1% of the time. So I similarly have very little patience for an LLM which is inherently going to make mistakes in non-deterministic ways.
I have not tried that, but it also seems like kind of a failure of the tool if I have to, you know? The whole point of a tool that can understand natural language is that you can just talk to it normally. If one has to figure out how to word the incantations just right to get a useful result... I'm not sure how that's better than just figuring out the code myself at that point.
Right, and I gave it then. Which is why I am not going to bother doing it this time. Like I said, nothing has changed.
But there's literally no reason for it to be doing that, either, when there is definitive information, easily available for reference. Its information it should never get wrong, in practice.
Yeah this is something that gets me about the frequent code-based hallucinations too. The things will make up non-existent APIs when the reference docs are right there. It does seem like it wouldn't be hard to hook up a function that checks "does this actually exist". I assume it must not actually be that simple, or they would've done it by now. But we'll see what they can do in the future.
Sure, the stakes are higher in this case. But it doesn't make the reasoning any less bad faith on the part of those supreme court justices.
Just to emphasize: conduit and pull strings. You want both, because even with conduit it's easier to use the string than to run a fish tape.
Rather, they unfairly enabled the unscrupulous to get ahead. I realize that the two look very similar in terms of outcome, but accurate framing is important.
The best part about being a grown-up is that any time you want can be a field trip to the taqueria!
That's pretty cool, I never realized!
Jersey Mike's just doesn't have any subs that I actually enjoy, so JJ wins by default. However, Erbert & Gerbert's (a sub chain in Wisconsin and I believe other midwestern states) blows both out of the water. It's just a shame that I can't get them any more where I live.
Maybe. But I would say I think it's more important to get proper authorization from the people for use of force, than it is to keep military operations secret. The president already has way too much power, we don't need him getting us into wars without any check on his power.
I can't possibly answer that question. You might want to ask the woman herself. I just don't think one should accuse people of hypocrisy without evidence, even (as in this case) people I don't like.
Off topic but... why would one take that away from you flair? I suspect that very few people here can read Greek, so most probably have no idea what it means. I definitely don't, anyways.
More options
Context Copy link