domain:streamable.com
ABigGuy4U
2d ago
Because it was an impossibly high bar. Nothing was able to do that, for years. The idea that you’d be able to talk to a computer program and not recognize it seemed like science fiction.
As somone who's been working in the field of machine learning since 2012 and generally agrees with @SubstantialFrivolity's assesment, I think that what we are looking here is a bifurcation in opinion between people looking for "bouba" solutions and those looking for "kiki" solutions.
If you're a high-school student or literature major with zero background in computer science looking to build a website or develop baby's first mobile app LLM generated code is a complete game changer. Literally the best thing since sliced bread. (The OP, and @self_made_human's comments reflect this)
If you're a decently competent programmer at a big tech firm, LLMs are at best a mild productivity booster. (See @kky's comments below)
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.
Finally if you're one of those dark wizards working in FORTRAN or some proprietary machine language because this is Sparta IBM/Nvidia/TMSC and the compute must flow, you're skeptical of the claim that an LLM can write code that would compile at all.
RoyGBivensAction
2d ago
1 in 5 cyclists are normal human beings, and the other 4 are CYCLISTS.
And those 4 CYCLISTS are basically Groundkeeper Willie from the meme. "You cyclists sure are a contentious people." "You just made an enemy for life!"
ActuallyATleilaxuGhola
Axolotl Tank Class of '24
2d ago
Bikes are less predictable. They can weave, turn, and change speeds much more suddenly than a car. When I'm walking and I hear a car coming behind me, I glance back once to see its trajectory and adjust my path accordingly. When I hear a bike coming quickly towards me, I usually glance back several times to track it since I can't fully tell where the cyclists plans to go.
iprayiam3
2d ago
Sure but album cover art is already a Lindy anachronism, and this makes sense to be a place of resistance. Neither albums nor covers really exist anymore. It’s more obligatory ritual than anything else and I think someone faking a ritual is more taboo than someone participating lazily.
It’s like the difference sending a thoughtful thank you note and signing a card and having someone else sign the card for you.
Everyone can agree that the first is superior, but the autist mistakes the second and third for being equivalent.
ToaKraka
Dislikes you
2d ago
I'm arguing not that we should ticket everyone who takes five or ten miles per hour, but just that those people can't turn around and complain when a cyclist does something that's technically illegal but otherwise makes sense and isn't particularly unsafe.
I think the commenters in this thread generally are complaining about cyclist behavior that doesn't make sense and is particularly unsafe. Most pertinently, the comment to which you replied stated:
There is an obvious problem with some bicyclists thinking that stop signs, red lights, and all other forms of traffic control don't apply to them [presumably even when the street is carrying non-negligible motorized traffic].
This morning I [presumably a motorist on a street with non-negligible motorized traffic] saw a bicyclist veer into the street even though there was a dedicated empty bike lane and an empty sidewalk.
(I personally do 95 percent of my driving on the freeway, so I almost never encounter bicyclists, and I don't have an opinion on whether the other commenters' observations are valid.)
RoyGBivensAction
2d ago
With my current pickup with its all-terrain tires? About 70 mph.
ActuallyATleilaxuGhola
Axolotl Tank Class of '24
2d ago
Disclaimer: I don't hate cyclists and have not had many negative experiences with cyclists while driving.
I always find it difficult to find sympaths for cyclists in America. My thinking goes like this.
- America is built for cars. Homes and jobs are far apart. Friends and employers expect you to travel distance only reasonably covered with a car.
- Thus, cars are a necessary part of life for most Americans. You need a car to get a job to feed your kids. You must buy and drive a car even if you don't really want to.
- Biking to work or to the grocery is not feasible for most people for many reasons. Your employer won't think it's cute that you show up sweaty, or drenched in rain, or 30 minutes late due to snow. Your wife won't be amused when you have to bike 30 minutes to Walmart every day to fill your backpack with food for the kids. How do you get to the hospital when someone is sick or injured? How do you take your family anywhere, especially when the kids are small?
- Thus, cycling is best thought of as either an elective hobby for those with money and time to burn, or a last resort for truly destitute and/or criminal. The former can afford a car if they want, they just choose not to. The latter have bigger problems than just not having reliable transportation and prioritizing bikes over cars won't fix those.
- Thus, I really don't care about cyclists' complaints. I mentally put cyclists in the same bucket as skateboarders, rollerbladers, and Segway riders. If you can do your hobby on public roads safely and without endangering yourself or or car drivers, then fine. If there's any inconvenience or risk to drivers, the just ban everything except cars and call it a day.
tl;dr I need to get to work on time or pick up food for dinner, I'm not interested in being delayed or inconvenienced to accommodate some bum or some stranger's vanity hobby.
An argument I'm somewhat sympathetic to is that if we don't accommodate cyclists, we'll be stuck in our current automobile-centric hellscape forever. That is probably true. However, my preferences go like this:
- Cities designed for bikes & public transit, cars rarely needed
- Cities designed for cars
- Cities designed for cars where cycling is awkwardly retrofitted into existing car infra with significant gaps where there are no provisions for bikes at all
In the U.S., number 3 seems by far the most common, and it sucks for everyone. The car/bike war is one of those problems that IMO can only really be solved by a strong executive power not beholden NIMBYs and lobbyists. Until one materializes, I'm supporting option 2 all the way.
erwgv3g34
2d ago
I don't care if the prescription is printed rather than handwritten. Or if it's in a national database instead of being a physical document. I just don't want it to be sent to a single pharmacy; that's fucking ridiculous.
Even better, no medications should require a prescription. Let it all be OTC. Then the prescription can simply be information about what your doctor recommends.
RoyGBivensAction
2d ago
You were not raised religious in any way, and that's how you found your way to it?
TitaniumButterfly
2d ago
I still love it (and relevant to here, especially for its representation of AI)
This is one of my least favorite things about it.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
2d ago
I saw one of his tweets shared in a random (very left-leaning) discord server. I had no idea how to explain that he was legitimately unhinged.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
2d ago
I’m not seeing the hate. There are problems with e-bikes and mopeds, and I think the infrastructure simply isn’t set up properly to make biking safe for cyclists and the cars around them. Trying to put bikes on the same roads as cars doesn’t work because of the speed and size differences and when the acceleration is added in, it’s hardly shocking that bikers end up getting the short end.
JarJarJedi
2d ago
The two work in tandem. The first premise (or, in Dem's hands, anti-premise) is about when Dems are in power - they then would just ignore the immigration law completely and mass-import as many migrants as they can. The whole "illegal" thing loses its meaning because what's the point in the law is the government is refusing to follow it and the courts just shrug and stand aside? It's not a part of legal system anymore, for any practical purpose, just a mockery of what the law is supposed to be.
The second part comes in if Dems temporarily lose some amount of power on the national level. Then they fall back to the local level (there's such thing as "state rights" and contrary to popular - among Dems - opinion, it's not just a mindless Nazi slogan!) and ever if the law tried to reassert itself by temporary slowing down the intake and deporting some of the illegals, they would obstruct it on every level possible. The law is sacrosanct if it serves the Party's purposes, and completely ignorable - moreover, must be ignored - if it contradicts them. In other words, if they don't control the law and it's execution, it's not worth having. Of course, this must be accompanies with demanding the other side to follow every letter of the law (and some that they'd invent on the spot just to make it harder to follow) and exhaust every possible legal delay and perform every triple-checked verification before they take any action.
Taken together, these two parts form a ratchet, which make it very easy to move the policy and the action on the ground towards open borders, and next to impossible to move it to the opposite direction. Little wonder is the Republicans aren't exactly happy with this state of affairs.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
2d ago
I'm curious, Mottizens: what speed would you drive at in perfect conditions (straight, flat, sunny, minimal traffic), in a 70 mph interstate?
Assuming that I'm confident that there are no cops, and I'm driving a good sports car, and I'm in the mood? I'd probably touch 130mph, carry 95-100mph.
Summer of Covid, when I was driving back and forth on an empty PA turnpike in a drop top twin turbo A4 quattro, I would consistently take it up to a daily triple, and just zip through the handful of cars on the road like they were standing still. When you're going 120 and they're going 80, it's like dodging obstacles at 40, it's fun.
On the other hand, if I'm in a more quotidian car and I'm just trying to get somewhere, probably in the 80-85mph range? That's normally a pretty comfortable speed, and I'm not too worried about getting pulled over, and really you have to hold 100 for an hour or more to see much benefit on travel time on the highway, and at that point it's kinda stressful.
Well, I don't think your analogy of the Turing Test to a test for general intelligence is a good one. The reason the Turing Test is so popular is that it's a nice, objective, pass-or-fail test. Which makes it easy to apply - even if it's understood that it isn't perfectly correlated with AGI. (If you take HAL and force it to output a modem sound after every sentence it speaks, it fails the Turing Test every time, but that has nothing to do with its intelligence.)
Unfortunately we just don't have any simple definition or test for "general intelligence". You can't just ask questions across a variety of fields and declare "not intelligent" as soon as it fails one (or else humans would fail as soon as you asked them to rotate an 8-dimensional object in their head). I do agree that a proper test requires that we dynamically change the questions (so you can't just fit the AI to the test). But I think that, unavoidably, the test is going to boil down to a wishy-washy preponderance-of-evidence kind of thing. Hence everyone has their own vague definition of what "AGI" means to them; honestly, I'm fine with saying we're not there yet, but I'm also fine arguing that ChatGPT already satisfies it.
There are plenty of dynamic, "general", never-before-seen questions you can ask where ChatGPT does just fine! I do it all the time. The cherrypicking I'm referring to is, for example, the "how many Rs in strawberry" question, which is easy for us and hard for LLMs because of how they see tokens (and, also, I think humans are better at subitizing than LLMs). The fact that LLMs often get this wrong is a mark against them, but it's not iron-clad "proof" that they're not generally intelligent. (The channel AI Explained has a "Simple Bench" that I also don't really consider a proper test of AGI, because it's full of questions that are easy if you have embodied experience as a human. LLMs obviously do not.)
In the movie Phenomenon, rapidly listing mammals from A-Z is considered a sign of extreme intelligence. I can't do it without serious thought. ChatGPT does it instantly. In Bizarro ChatGPT world, somebody could write a cherrypicked blog post about how I do not have general intelligence.
Rov_Scam
2d ago
And if you can tell me where exactly in the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code it says that the posted limits are only suggestions and motorists are free to drive whatever speed they want provided it lies within the engineering design speed then I'd say you have a point. But you seem to have missed mine. I'm not arguing that we should ticket everyone who takes five or ten miles per hour, just that those people can't turn around and complain when a cyclist does something that's technically illegal but otherwise makes sense and isn't particularly unsafe.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
2d ago
There are of course many bigger problems than electric bikes or cyclists in the world or even in New York (crazy homeless for instance). Nevertheless, cycling shouldn't be needed in a rich country. Rich countries should have well-functioning public transport in urban centres which is apparently missing in America.
If you want to go somewhere, drive or use public transport. This is fast and you can use the travel time to read or whatever if you're not driving.
If you want to wander around, or exercise, walk. You can mull things over in your head without needing to be in a high state of alertness.
In between is not a good place to be as people point out downthread. It causes accidents due to there being no good infrastructure for it. And there's no good infrastructure for it because it fundamentally doesn't make any sense, there's no need for this medium speed, low-safety, exhausting means of transport.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
2d ago
Pennyfarthing.
Great visibility, terrible crumple zones.
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
2d ago
I'm curious, Mottizens: what speed would you drive at in perfect conditions (straight, flat, sunny, minimal traffic), in a 70 mph interstate?
No cops? Somewhere around 120mph probably. Maybe more, I've never had my current car to the top speed.
vorpa-glavo
2d ago
I think it was around the time Lukas did his ‘why you should steal a woman’s photo to impersonate one online’ thread.
Could you please link to this thread? Sounds interesting.
JarJarJedi
2d ago
A good slogan should go from the ears to the mouth smoothly, without stopping in the brain. That's what Orwell called "doubleplusgood duckspeak".
Well, shows what I know. Must be a voice changer or something. (That is not the kulak voice I was familiar with)
More options
Context Copy link