NobleLie

Nah. Even with zero temperature this is still variation.

The problem with that is LLMs can output words or symbols that seen like it used "reason" to produce. But for everything the core algorithm does, it's simply nothing like the wetware reasoning to get to the same answer. So he didn't move goalposts. He always meant the reasoning that stems from human cognition.

Technically if it has that, it'd be singularity no? So basically the premise is they are doing nothing of the sort. Prove any LLM enough and it really does show it has no quarrels contradicting itself or being bossed around. Has no belief / no orientation etc. It's truly mindless but tricks our mind and soul (or whatever) probably.

It appears they don't need to reason or be intelligent to be able to produce working solutions for code. But sure let wild and unmonitored? I wrangle my LLMs like the code monkeys they are. They help materialize code and then you need to sculpt it (and test harness of varying sorts)

It really can be useful. It's very different from old world programming.

With very different final results though..?

The boiling - cooking - is the bias here. Winograds Understanding Computers and Cognition is the most excellent resource in 2026, written over three decades ago by now.

The nuance is lost on LLM agentic dominant partakers.

Yep Claude Code CLI does A LOT (which is now confirmed even more)

The question is, are you getting value from your setups or not?

"Claude, scp my tmux config over to that box"

Grok, show me the place where the least people died eating product X.

Yep with a human in the loop to process these larger sprawling plan docs (inflated with the intent of the designer iteratively)

Some get deleted from repo others archived, others merged or referenced elsewhere. It's kind of organic.

Excellent comment (seriously)

Thanks. Sometimes I feel like I'm going insane attempting to ŕeason with people who think the opposite. That these are oracles imbued with human level intellect and creativity.

Now, sure, these models can be impressive - but it's a warped lens of humanities own impressive (selected) corpuses.

My take is its less so about being physically comfortable, but there is a different type of comfort by the protection of the nest from predators. It's like being uncomfortable to have peace of bird mind, in other words.

How many from long flu to fairly compare?

It started with the flexner report (1910). I urge you to look into it if you are interested in this topic and let me know your thoughts

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexner_Report

Yep. It was probably the singular reason (of a few) he lost 2020.

Schumpeter called it the eroding foundation of Capitalism. Its not technically Capitalism, as the system, at fault though. It's interesting. Feel free to explore it more. Or perhaps you already do

> expresses instructions

To instruct is akin to providing an input. Where do we input to? The program. The program is programmed; but most importantly, the input is not programmed in the sense the program is programmed. It is, perhaps, thoughfully designed (or not). This role is best described as Prompt Designing or Prompt Engineering, not Prompt "Programming". In any case, it is indeed very important. But in my respectful opinion, it is not programming.

It's kind of like thinking that entering a query into a search engine is programming - a host of techniques can be utilized to optimize how that input effects the output (tomes can be written on this just as they can for LLM prompt design by now).

I can kind of defend that premise but it breaks the meaning of conventional usages, and creates more confusion than it brings clarity.

No...prompts are definitely not programs, prompts are inputs to programs. How someone can write a blog post on such a demonstrably fallacious premise is beyond me.

I am beginning to write a blog post in rebuttal, because it's so fascinating.

Some people believe that their beliefs and way of life should be enforced. Here, which human habits or activities are allowed or "OK" even if partially or very deletorious.

The desired force vector varies in magntitude and orientation, but can, in the extreme include removal of independence / imprisonment or less extreme banning and fining etc

Because a single or group of people believe it, it must be for everyone, equally.

Considering it's predicted shape is that of obelisk ("rod") one is left to imagine that this finding has only metagenomics behind it.

I liked t9 word and 9 key. Could type without looking.

In short, "plus"

Do they?

I'd think the application would be used more for understanding the psychedelic experience. Not about safety. There is such a wide tome of experiences - there are going to emerge similarities to a knowledgeable AI that can load it all up at once. I'm very curious what patterns can emerge with up to date language models.

Are you sure that is all the brain does?

Because they theoretically worked at some point but now they do not.

I'd pay money for this

"Close to being able to do basically everything"

A bit vague, no?