domain:youtube.com
Folamh3
57m ago
zeke5123a
56m ago
Let’s say you have 50 dollars. Let’s say investor X has 30 dollars but can borrow 70 at 5% interest rate.
You both invest and get a twenty percent return over two years.
You end up with 60 dollars. X ends up after paying off the debt 43 dollars. That’s over a 40% return on X’s 30 dollars.
Now of course X took on much more risk. The question in your fact pattern is how much risk are you taking on. if there is decent equity cushion in your home and given that the rate so low, the answer is “probably not that much risk.”
2D3D
56m ago
Frankly the USA lacks a clean racial/cultural split across demarcated geographies to let a proper civil war play out. Gretchen Whitmer isn't rallying Dutch-German Americans in the Midwest to take up arms against the New Englanders of Hochul. There are too few concentrated natural resources or geographies worth fighting over in the USA because it is so large. The most likely failure point will be race based riots collapsing a major metropolitan area totally combined with a refusal by a governor to send in the national guard or said national guard rebelling. Think full riots of BLM and Rodney King with 0 law enforcement for a few weeks. A spontaneous violent mob horizontally coordinated along racial lines for ease of identification just to wreck shit. Less armed factions battling street by street Stalingrad style, more Harlem Riots with more destruction.
Civil wars really require geographically consolidated factions free of any local element capable of resistance. This is especially easy when the state institutions are token rebrandings of existing tribal or ethnic power structures. When the state falls, the militias simply swap out their patches and return to their old ways.
ace
53m ago
Yudkowsky believes:
- Human-value-aligned AIs make up a miniscule spec of the vast space of all possible minds, and we currently have no clue how to find one.
- We have to get the alignment of a super human intelligence AI right on the first try or all humans will die.
- Coordinating enough governments to enforce a worldwide ban on threat of violence of AI development until we learn how to build friendly AIs would be nice, but it's not politically tenable in our world.
- The people who are currently building AIs don't appreciate how dangerous the situation we're in is and don't understand how hard it is to get an aligned super human artificial intelligence aligned on the first try.
Given these propositions, his plan is to attempt to build an aligned super-intelligent AI before anybody else can build a non-aligned super-intelligent AI -- or at least it was. Given his recent public appearances, I get the impression he's more or less given up hope.
Primaprimaprima
Bigfoot is an interdimensional being
48m ago
Player-Driven Emergence in LLM-Driven Game Narrative (and accompanying discussion on HN):
We explore how interaction with large language models (LLMs) can give rise to emergent behaviors, empowering players to participate in the evolution of game narratives. Our testbed is a text-adventure game in which players attempt to solve a mystery under a fixed narrative premise, but can freely interact with non-player characters generated by GPT-4, a large language model. We recruit 28 gamers to play the game and use GPT-4 to automatically convert the game logs into a node-graph representing the narrative in the player's gameplay. We find that through their interactions with the non-deterministic behavior of the LLM, players are able to discover interesting new emergent nodes that were not a part of the original narrative but have potential for being fun and engaging. Players that created the most emergent nodes tended to be those that often enjoy games that facilitate discovery, exploration and experimentation.
Recently there’s been increasing interest in the integration of LLMs and video games. With currently available models, creating an entire living virtual world with an unlimited number of realistic side quests, characters, and interactions is now a “mere” engineering challenge. No more pre-scripted dialogue trees; instead you can simply converse with NPCs in natural language with no limitations (or at least that’s the promise, as models become increasingly efficient).
This is another step towards what appears to be the natural endpoint of the technological development of video games: the recreation of life in replica, a replica at one’s mercy, an infinite horizon of choice without responsibility or constraint.
For a long time I thought that video games were the necessary next step in a development that could be described as “spiritual”. Games are largely an amalgamation of prior media - literature, painting, music, film - but they do introduce a new element (or at least they develop this element to previously undreamed of heights), and that is the element of interactivity, i.e. the ability to make a choice, to participate as the player in the creation of the art and to make the art be something other than what it would have been in your absence. I conceived of interactivity as the raw material out of which a new aesthetic language would be fashioned which would bring us closer to realizing the promise of art. But I have since begun to grow uneasy with this way of thinking.
In some sense I was too seduced by the possibility of finding something “new”, anything new, to detect the longstanding inconsistencies in my own thought. From a young age I always preferred linear, narrative-driven games as opposed to open world sandboxes. My favorite games were games that were devoid of choice, games that robbed you of the ability to make a choice. I found the idea of multiple endings for a story to be distasteful. Yes, you can choose to save this character or not, you can choose to join the bad guys or not - but now that we’ve had our fun imagining all the what-if scenarios, can you tell me what really happened? Do you have the courage to tell me? Do you have the strength of vision to see the truth, the singular truth?
Choice is antithetical to the aesthetic sacrifice. The artist sacrifices all alternate possibilities to distinguish one thing and one thing alone, to say - this one, and no others! No matter how lowly a thing it is - a dirtied article of clothing (as in Van Gogh’s A Pair of Shoes), a completely ordinary sequence of events on a day in Dublin in the year 1904 (as in Joyce’s Ulysses) - he is now stuck with it. This is where he signs his name and stakes his wager, for better or worse. It is this seemingly inexplicable devotion to one law, one vision, one truth, that makes possible any kind of experience that may be called aesthetic. An artist who hedges his bets and does not accept the risk that accompanies his act inspires no confidence in us.
The receiver of the message too enters into a sacrifice, insofar as the message may be incomprehensible or even dangerous to him. In this way an oath is forged between artist and audience. The failure to foreclose the horizon of possibility is the deferral of the signing of the bond.
Is there any great work that would be improved by the addition of choice, by the addition of alternate possibilities? Would Plato’s account of the trial and death of Socrates be better if there were a possibility of Socrates simply... not dying? If Callicles’s warning to Socrates, that his devotion to the “effeminate” subject of philosophy would be his downfall, might not come to pass? If Socrates might be able to eloquently defend himself at trial and avoid conviction? If he might escape from prison before his execution?
The deferral of the inevitable here would be nothing more than the refusal to establish the founding myth of philosophy, the myth that links philosophy with the sign of death. The internal law of Plato’s drama is clear (and the law of historical fidelity is irrelevant): Socrates must die. This is not to say that one is forbidden from creating new works in which new possibilities are imagined. Only that the unity of the original work should remain undisturbed in its repose.
Or you can just like, have fun with GTA6 when it integrates LLM-generated missions, I guess. Whatever.
Awarenesss
46m ago
Yes, taxes. It went up by $400/mo last year, and I expect another $100/mo again this year. That’s not minuscule to me. But you’re right—long-term it mostly washes out.
Awarenesss
42m ago
I do have housemates now which has substantially helped with paying the mortgage (and I’d recommend to any single person with a home!).
I want to move to area X because a) I like the environment, and b) that’s where I spend a lot of my time, allowing me to save an estimated 100 hours per year of driving (one-hour round trip twice per week). Housemates don’t help this much, even if I save a bunch of money.
To me "political" implies intra-country, not extra-national
I see, well I certainly did not mean it that way in this case. I'm talking specifically about threats to a given established regime. What distinctions or origin we draw I don't really see as relevant. I'm talking about how power treats its challengers writ large.
I have no idea who, concretely, you're talking about
Anyone who is a political enemy of the United States. In the Obama iteration that means mostly islamists, known or suspected, and their friends and family.
Certainly not friends of your average westerner, but they're not granted trial or human rights which they are entitled to according to the ideological principles of the American regime. Clearly demonstrating that power is ultimately unconstrained by ideology.
And it'd be foolish to think that this is exceptional, given the US has engaged, on its own civilian population, in arbitrary internment and mass immolation even in quite recent history.
At this point I want to stress that I'm not trying to tarnish the reputation of the US in particular, we all have skeletons in our closets, and it's a very nice country indeed. But it is still a country. And power works there the same way it does everywhere else in the world, however much we want to delude ourselves that magical dirt or pieces of paper make it otherwise.
Vae victis.
No_one
36m ago
pretense of largesse towards compliant minorities.
Pretense? Tuvans and Chechens both seem very favoured, moreso than ethnic russians.
Awarenesss
30m ago
I’m in north Garland, so Garland ISD, which isn’t the highest value school district, but still a not-so-bad area. Open to your predictions.
Uptown is where I want to live for a few reasons:
- I’d save ~100 hours per year of driving (any further south is too far of a commute)
- the environment is ambitious in various ways, a vibe I’m looking for to boost a few aspects of my life and one my current place doesn’t have at all
- people I know who live in Uptown enjoy it and I mostly trust their takes
- I want to live with my girlfriend and Uptown is as far north as she’s willing to move
I think I’ll talk with a property management company and see what they have to say.
cjet79
26m ago
Great game, I'm hoping the second one that they have announced is as good as the first.
2D3D
17m ago
The current 'favored minority' position seems a function of the deft political power employed by Shiogu and the necessity of Kadyrov as a strongman to keep Chechnya in line. Bribes siphoned by Shoigu and paid to Kadyrov are not necessarily indicative of any Muscovite high opinion of those peoples and cultures detached from their political leaders. There has been little wealth flowing downwards to the tuvans or chechens from Moscow, and doubtless the utility of Shoigu and Kadyrov in keeping those populations docile is part of their value proposition to the state.
cjet79
15m ago
Game looks good, I'm surprised that I haven't heard of it until now. I wonder if I have it ignored on steam for some reason.
SSCReader
9m ago
Interestingly 1) is basically the conservative Hobbesian view right? That all of civilization is just a skin over our inherent natures. Women it appears are aware of the Leviathian shaped hole, even if they have mever heatd of Hobbes.
Which probably aligns with memes where men threaten their daughters prom dates with guns. They believe an 18yo man can't be trusted with their daughter without some fear being involved.
The question is are they right or wrong. I might suggest the large amount of rape during invasion and conflict might point to an underlying truth many men are uncomfortable with.
That more men than we might think would rape when the social order is not there.
Of course that is just a subset of the idea that more of us would murder or commit violence in general in the absence of a restraining force. The state of war of all against all.
"It follows that, in such a condition, every man has a Right to everything--even to one another's body. And therefore, as long as this natural Right of every man to own everything exists, there can be no security to any man--no matter how strong or wise he is."
In a Hobbesian view there may not be a lot of difference between a bear and a human unburdened by societal restraint. We both exist in a state of nature.
Of course the bear is atill stronger and has better natural weapons. Is it better to be hunted by a bear or a human (assuming the human only has what they can cobble togerher in a forest)?
Walterodim
Only equals speak the truth, that’s my thought on’t
8m ago
This borders on AAQC territory for how generalizable and accurate the advice is. The only thing I'd add is sorting out style, which is also not actually very hard once you stop insisting that you don't care about style.
Realistically, I want to achieve something halfway between go-anywhere-do-anything and a rigid tale. Many good authors have the laws of narrative ingrained so deeply that they can write almost on the fly. New ideas are fit into a satisfying framework as they arise, or else rejected. There may or may not be a story plan to follow, and that may or may not be altered as writing continues.
On this basis, I've been trying to develop a 'plotty' roleplaying LLM that can fit events into a classic story structure as they occur, whilst incorporating the user's actions. So, in your Socrates example, the-user-as-Socrates can take actions to try and prevent his death. If he renounces philosophy, you can still make that work as a tragedy: a man gives up what really matters, only to discover that life isn't worth living without his principles. Or Socrates' escape attempts can succeed, and you have yourself a thriller as he tries to escape persecution. Like any dungeon master, it may have to break kayfabe at some point and tell the user, "you can do this if you really want to, but I can't make it work with the story" but in general this should be done silently and behind the scenes.
Unfortunately, I haven't had much luck getting an LLM to think on this level of meta. I don't know if it's a limitation of the finetuned models I have access to, or I'm just not running something big enough. Would be grateful to hear from anyone running >13b models.
Walterodim
Only equals speak the truth, that’s my thought on’t
4m ago
I confess to enjoying the Costco guys. Still cringe, but wholesome.
OP doesn't sound like he's only looking for a shag.
OP may have to die before the truth is revealed. Cyrano as a service.
More options
Context Copy link