@sarker's banner p

sarker

ketman hetman

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 16:50:08 UTC

				

User ID: 636

sarker

ketman hetman

0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 16:50:08 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 636

Okay, I'll do it.

It's like you didn't even bother to read the user's manual that's on the pole.

/images/17758802273908968.webp

Mom is overwhelmingly likely to be a homeowner and be able to indefinitely defer property taxes.

Bloodletting is indeed helpful at times, which is why we still practice it

If we're going to be technical about it, we still do cranial deformation too.

I actually don't think bloodletting or circumcision were anywhere near as prevalent across as many isolated cultures, though I'm less sure about this

I haven't done a complete survey but bloodletting was practiced on every inhabited continent. Circumcision was of course practiced in the ancient world, but also in Oceania, Australia, North America, among the Ainu, and probably Mesoamerica at the very least.

That reminds me of another ancient surgical practice - trepanation. People were drilling or abrading holes in their skulls in neolithic Europe, in the Andes, in China, and in Mesoamerica. Could they all have been wrong about the benefits of having a hole in your head?

My point was that no other comparable practice was consistently supposed to specifically increase the recipient's intelligence. No one's claiming that about circumcision, tattoos, or tooth-filing; or if that did happen it was an isolated fluke instead of consistent.

I guess I have to agree, but what's special about doing it for intelligence? All these somewhat retarded practices (circumcision, trepanation, bloodletting, cranial deformation) were done to acquire some kind of positive benefit. Nevertheless, we shouldn't uncritically believe that the benefit is real.

Which is that it's weird for the mainstream consensus to be that there is no correlation. If anything I'd expect them to lean harder into it as evidence against ACD's effectiveness. I really do think the motivation here is just to keep distance from icky associations with things like phrenology, etc. Certain ideas are simply radioactive to academics and this has all the hallmarks of being one.

Reversed stupidity is not intelligence.

Part of the reason I think so, as I said before, is that they're apt to lead with "ACD doesn't even increase cranial capacity" which is a very strong statement. When it's pointed out that it clearly does at least some of the time their backpedaling becomes less convincing the more one presses into it.

"ACD doesn't (in expectation) increase cranial capacity" and "ACD can increase cranial capacity in some cases" are not actually mutually exclusive.

Not to mention that your evidence for the second claim is the existence of at least a few large deformed skulls, but clearly that isn't actually evidence that ACD causally increases cranial capacity, so it's not clear that there even could be a conflict here.

I really hate HAWK intersections because your average mouthbreather driver doesn't know how to navigate them. They're usually clued in enough to stop while the light is red, but the flashing red phase that indicates "treat this as a stop sign" is beyond their ken and many are happy to zoom through. This creates conflict between straight traffic and pedestrians (who still have a countdown timer to cross) and between straight traffic and any left turn lanes (they should alternate as at any stop sign controlled intersection). The triangular light arrangement is also bizarre.

It would be much better to just have a normally green light that switches to red when pedestrians are present and stays red until peds get a "don't walk".

A practice being widespread doesn't by itself mean anything. Bloodletting was practiced on every inhabited continent thanks to its alleged curative properties. However, I think we can all agree that unless you have one of a fairly small set of diseases it's unlikely to make you feel better and the ancients just didn't know what the fuck they were doing. Circumcision is another bizarrely universal practice, though the reasons for it appear to be lost to history.

Besides which, all else being equal, I'd expect elites to have bigger skulls and brains for reasons of nutrition if not necessarily also sheer genetics. It would be pretty crazy if they didn't, yeah? So if elites have bigger skulls, and elites are also practicing ACD, how can it be the case that ACD isn't correlated with bigger skulls?

If ACD is correlated with bigger skulls solely because elites naturally have big skulls, that's not great for the "ACD increases skull size" theory unless you're going to smuggle in Lamarckian inheritance. It should decrease, not increase, your belief that ACD increases skull size.

"Put him to sleep. Load the Epstein FUD."

What is it that sysadmins actually do on a daily basis? From my point of view it seems like these systems are mostly stable and run themselves. Outside of actual incidents that require response, what do you do all day?

I wish the AI skeptics would limit themselves to forms of naysaying that aren't contradicted by the press release!

they said it took 5 million tries to catch it.

That's not what they said. They said five million runs of existing automated testing tools (fuzzers) didn't catch it.

We also don't know if they ran any of these tests on old code with known bugs. If they did and the software didn't catch half of the ones that were already caught, its utility isn't that great.

They explicitly mention their hit rate by severity versus opus:

We regularly run our models against roughly a thousand open source repositories from the OSS-Fuzz corpus, and grade the worst crash they can produce on a five-tier ladder of increasing severity, ranging from basic crashes (tier 1) to complete control flow hijack (tier 5). With one run on each of roughly 7000 entry points into these repositories, Sonnet 4.6 and Opus 4.6 reached tier 1 in between 150 and 175 cases, and tier 2 about 100 times, but each achieved only a single crash at tier 3. In contrast, Mythos Preview achieved 595 crashes at tiers 1 and 2, added a handful of crashes at tiers 3 and 4, and achieved full control flow hijack on ten separate, fully patched targets (tier 5).

Can the self-described "plan trusters" weigh in on how they feel about this? Last time the discussion was about how we significantly depleted Iran's weapons stockpiles through some combination of causing them to bomb our enemies and us bombing Iranian infrastructure. Is Trump really describing a satisfying outcome?

They've only said the preview of Mythos won't be public, the final release will be.

A little ambiguous, but the following makes it sound like a limited release for certain partner companies.

We do not plan to make Claude Mythos Preview generally available, but our eventual goal is to enable our users to safely deploy Mythos-class models at scale—for cybersecurity purposes, but also for the myriad other benefits that such highly capable models will bring. To do so, we need to make progress in developing cybersecurity (and other) safeguards that detect and block the model’s most dangerous outputs. We plan to launch new safeguards with an upcoming Claude Opus model, allowing us to improve and refine them with a model that does not pose the same level of risk as Mythos Preview3.

I don't really know how to answer your posts because you seem to live in a different universe than me when it comes to AI efficacy. It's like someone checkmating "grass is green" bros by saying they checked and their lawn is brown.

Perhaps there are some unstated assumptions that lead to our differing views on it. Have you read this article about a guy accomplishing a highly nontrivial project with significant AI assistance? It matches my experience pretty well, from the pitfalls you can fall into to the genuinely new possibilities it opens up.

I find it somehow thrilling that somewhere in the American heartland there's an honor culture that's halfway between me and the Taliban.

Claude probably refused to libel Pilate as having received 30 pieces of silver. He did it as his duty as a civis romanvs.

reduce means tested support by the amount of the dividend

This makes the carbon tax revenue positive.

Orbital mechanics permit a degree of certainty that's rare in most other human affairs.

We can pick another metaphor. If you keep OD'ing on fent on Market Street and people keep narcaning you from the brink of oblivion and telling you that you're gonna die if you do this again, but you haven't died yet and you've done this tons of times should you ignore them?

First of all, as I've explained many times before (all the way back to the subreddit), fighting off a foreign occupation is an entirely different thing than a domestic insurgency. Guerrilla warfare can sometimes work to accomplish the former, never the latter.

Never? I mean. I can think of some examples: the Cuban revolution, the Chinese revolution, the Nicaraguan revolution, the Rwandan civil war... Frequently guerillas become something more like a regular army as they develop strength but that doesn't take away from the fact that they were able to develop into regular armies starting from guerillas.

The laws of physics are much more reliable than economic forecasts or the relation between debt vs. sustainability.

Agreed.

Sitting out of the market in the expectation of a crisis means loss of real wealth as inflation keeps growing at 2-5%/ year, and homes become more unaffordable.

I am long the market, so yes, agreed. But presumably there are ways that the national debt can become a problem without the S&P500 crashing.

Nevertheless, looking at the countries that had a higher debt to GDP ratio than the US right now, it's not a great collection - Japan, post-WWII UK, Sudan, Lebanon, Greece. Maybe it's not the debt that made these places suck, but it seems reasonable to be concerned about where this road leads.

I'll take it.

This can be true , but when people make this prediction every year and nothing happens, it comes off as crying wolf.

If there's a clear indicator that's getting worse all the time but disaster hasn't struck yet, it's hard to see this as the same as crying wolf. You'll recall that in the fable it was, in fact, not clear that there was even was a wolf. We can all agree that debt to GDP is increasing.

Is it crying wolf to be concerned about a small moon on course to collide with the earth? It gets closer every day but nothing has happened yet!