So you can get updates while you are at work.

Isn’t it odd that researchers who should be pros at caring about and finding the most correct metrics for every topic are obsessed with a proxy for quality that is just about the most disjoint possible? It should be embarrassing.

Why you would want to spend time around such a hypocritical animal is something I’ll never understand.

All aspects of owning a cat really do seem to be negative where owning a dog is a mixed bag.

Missed a rhyme

It will lead to more dark money. It’s very hard to accurately measure a persons net worth when their financials aren’t just a house and an IRA like the average person. Especially if they don’t want you to see it. You’ll never be able to implement that tax in a consistent way.

They will just live in other countries if being a billionaire is illegal.

What was right wing about him?

https://gvid.tv/

In the future there will be media queries for how old the reader is.

The dependency hell of JS is caused by React. It’s an ironic turn because node gained popularity in part because it was one of the first to have a coupled package manager with a massive public contribution model, full of a billion packages that follow the unix philosophy of “everything should do only one thing, and do it well” Dependency hell would disappear if people stopped popularizing competing swiss army knives. It’s made worse by people trying to mash these swiss army knives together just to improve portfolio.

We’ve gotten to the point where you aren’t considered a real professional unless you start even the smallest projects with maximum technical debt.

It should never be impressive that you used a tool. If the tool made programming it easier then it’s not a mental feat. If the tool made programming it harder, then people should think you are kind of slow for using a tool that made development harder. This is why brag culture over what tools are used makes no sense. Just use tools that make life easier. If it doesn’t make life easier, stop using it.

Hey, don’t knock cyberpunk till you try it.

4 pins. So standard length because four pin aux exists
https://www.amazon.com/Auxiliary-Braided-Compatible-Stereos-Headphones/dp/B07PJW6RQ7

There’s nothing wrong with human rights but how does harming the lives of innocent people help human rights? It makes it hard to sell to other people you are serious about human rights. Instead you just look like a problem. A problem that motivates leaning on fascism. So when stores get robbed you are making negative ground with anything you want to do.

It is objectively cool. But harming mom and pop businesses gets really hard to sell as cool. Trying to convince people outside of your political silo that burning cop cars is cool is difficult but possible. The other one isn’t.

Yes. But it isn’t robbing mom and pop stores.

Well you loose the political game when it ends up on TV. You are making negative progress with your political goals because the political will to get rid of what are perceived as “lawless illegals” only increases.

Is it morally right to loose? Because this is how you loose.

Robbing stores isn’t good PR. I’m working with the right to do positive PR for you guys if you ever do anything to a cop or to cop property. I’m pretty good at selling it “as long as they aren’t harming peaceful citizens or local businesses. Who the fuck cares if zog has a bad day.” Then you have people looting stores and I can’t run PR for you on the right. And they look at the news and say, “See, getting the illegals out of here was a good idea.”

When people steal stuff the whole movement, even the people not doing it, just becomes propaganda for the other side. What would be increadable PR is if crowds physically prevented looting.

This is why most gun owners prefer GOA. NRA just inserts itself as the face of gun owners, doesn’t actually represent us. GOA is actually libertarian, is for armed citizens not militarized cops. Stays in its lane with politics. Doesn’t go out of its way to get bad PR with left.

Thinking gun owners like the NRA is about on the same level as thinking we shoot clips. They are the AARP of guns. They exist only to collect money from idiots.

Intuition is about the only thing it has. It’s a statistical system. The problem is it doesn’t have logic. We assume because its computer based that it must be more logic oriented but it’s the opposite. That’s the problem. We can’t get it to do logic very well because it basically feels out the next token by something like instinct. In particular it doesn’t mask or disconsider irrelevant information very well if two segments are near each other in embedding space, which doesn’t guarantee relevance. So then the model is just weighing all of this info, relevant or irrelevant to a weighted feeling for the next token.

This is the core problem. People can handle fuzzy topics and discrete topics. But we really struggle to create any system that can do both like we can. Either we create programming logic that is purely discrete or we create statistics that are fuzzy.

Of course this issue of masking out information that is close in embedding space but is irrelevant to a logical premise is something many humans suck at too. But high functioning humans don’t and we can’t get these models to copy that ability. Too many people, sadly many on the left in particular, not only will treat association as always relevant but sometimes as equivalence. RE racism is assoc with nazism is assoc patriarchy is historically related to the origins of capitalism ∴ nazism ≡ capitalism. While national socialism was anti-capitalist. Associative thinking removes nuance. And sadly some people think this way. And they 100% can be replaced by LLMs today, because at least the LLM is mimicking what logic looks like better though still built on blind association. It just has more blind associations and finetune weighting for summing them. More than a human does. So it can carry that to mask as logical further than a human who is on the associative thought train can.

Even defining reason is hard and becomes a matter of philosophy more than science. For example, apply the same claims to people. Now I’ve given you something to think about. Or should I say the Markov chain in your head has a new topic to generate thought states for.