TehPers

Surely agreeing to that contract was not part of the job description when they signed on. I’m curious if they could argue that the contract was signed under duress and have it voided, then sue the company for using their likeness without permission.

Because his name is Andrew and the other guy’s name is Zohran.

And yes, I’ve met people who vote this way.

New Mexico somehow looked at the low bar of childcare subsidies for low income households, told that bar to go fuck itself, then raised it to free childcare for everyone.

Good job! Let’s see what other bars they can raise next. I’m hoping this is a huge success for them.

I would hope this happens but who knows. It feels like making something as basic as insulin accessible is somehow controversial in the US, so it’d probably end up being accessible in other countries to cure cancer while in the US your insurance would pay $1m, never approve it for you, then max out your copay and somehow charge you more beyond that just for the consultation.

I bought a license many, many years ago and loved SmartGit. I just use the cli now, but if you’re looking for a GUI, it’s a great choice.

This escalated quickly. There are many I wouldn’t mourn, but to say someone needs to die right after they donate a crazy amount to a good cause doesn’t give the kind of impression I think you’re hoping for.

They’ve been curing cancer for longer than I’ve been alive, but it’s also clear that the treatments over time have gotten more effective. This makes me wonder though: if a 100% effective cure (or preventative) for cancer comes around, what will be the next big goal?

Found you one.

While interesting, can you provide a credible source for the image? I’m not doubting that they have concepts of a plan but would certainly like to see where the image came from.

It’s not really (which says more about corporations than anything).

Yep! You would need not only an AI superintelligence capable of reflecting and adapting, but legislation which holds liable those superintelligences and grants them the rights and obligations of a human. Because there is no concept of reward of punishment to a LLM, they can never be replacements for people.

Bootstrap sellers are going to be booming soon.

There is a fundamental limitation of all LLMs that prevents it from doing as much as you might think, regardless of how accurate they are (and they are not):

LLMs cannot take liability. When they make mistakes, they cannot take responsibility for those mistakes. The person who used the LLM will always be liable instead.

So any automation as a result of LLMs removing jobs will end up punting that liability to the next person up the chain. Management will literally have nobody to blame but themselves, and that’s their worst nightmare.

Anyway, this is of course assuming capabilities that don’t exist.

The conclusion of this experiment is objectively wrong when generalized. At work, to my disappointment, we have been trying for years to make this work, and it has been failure after failure (and I wish we’d just stop, but eventually we moved to more useful stuff like building tools adjacent to the problem, which is honestly the only reason I stuck around).

There are a couple reasons why this problem cannot succeed:

1. The outputs of LLMs are nondeterministic. Most problems require determinism. For example, REST API standards require idempotency from some kinds of requests, and a LLM without a fixed seed and a temperature of 0 will return different responses at least some of the time.
2. Most real-world problems are not simple input-output machines. When calling, let’s say for example, an API to post a message to Lemmy, that endpoint does a lot of work. It needs to store the message in the darabase, federate the message, and verify that the message is safe. It also needs to validate the user’s credential before all of this, and it needs to record telemetry for observability purposes. LLMs are not able to do all this. They might, if you’re really lucky, be able to generate code that does this, but a single LLM call can’t do it by itself.
3. Some real world problems operate on unbounded input sizes. Context sizes are constrained and as currently designed cannot handle unbounded inputs. See signal processing for an example of this, and for an example of a problem a LLM cannot solve because it cannot receive the input.
4. LLM outputs cannot be deterministically improved. You can make changes to prompts and so on but the output will not monotonically improve when doing this. Improving one result often means sacrificing another result.
5. The kinds of models you want to run are not in your control. Using Claude? K Anthropic updated the model and now your outputs all changed and you need to update your prompts again. This fucked us over many times.

The list keeps going on. My suggestion? Just don’t. You’ll spend less time implementing the thing than trying to get an LLM to do it. You’ll save operating expenses. You’ll be less of an asshole.

Graham Platner isn’t an elected official, nor are any of the three legislators named Graham Platner, nor are any of Louis Rossman’s other names Graham Platner.

Please, if you’re going to troll, make a better attempt at it. Or even better, take it somewhere else.

So when can we start taking these enzymes like vaccines? I’d sure like to undo the damage done to me over years or plastic lobbying.

He literally put out a video not that long ago praising three democratic legislators for proposing a right to repair bill. Weird impression.

By “crackers” I mean “black hat hackers”.

Ok I just misread it then, sorry!

What they’re doing should be outright illegal in most countries; it’s equivalent to changing a contract unilaterally after both parties signed it.

Update to [COMPANY NAME]'s Policies

Yes, this should be illegal, but it’s already common practice. I’m just hoping that enough of this will eventually get people to stop buying these products, and hopefully we can start seeing some real legislation against it in some countries.

Additionally, I’d strongly advise against buying any sort of “smart” device, unless you’re pretty sure the benefits of connecting your toaster to the internet outweighs all the risks.

This should be obvious at this point. “Smart” just means “internet-connected”, and we already know what happens to every device that connects to a remote server during regular operation: telemetry (and not the nice debugging kind but the “what do you use” kind), and advertisements.

Including corporations and crackers

The “crackers” part of this confuses me. Samsung is a Korean company. The chairman’s name is Lee Jae-yong (이재용). Samsung NA’s CEO is Yoonie Joung. Maybe I’m misreading this?

My high school had more strict passing requirements for PE. Not to be ableist or anything, but the physical portion of this test is a pretty low bar for most able-bodied remotely fit people.

As for the drug test portion, this is actually probably the hardest requirement. I’ve seen how strict the drug testing requirement is, and even recreational use of weed can screw you on those tests for longer than you’d think.