bende511

how many of the people on your linkedin feed have a financial incentive to talk up AI and LLMs? LinkedIn is truly a fascinatingly weird social media

he's either delusional, or more likely lying. what he's saying is absolute nonsense and he should know better, but if he said the truth people might ask why he needs tens of billions of dollars

The things LLMs can actually be put to good use for either are bad for society (spam, scams, cheating on homework) or do not justify the massive investment. Better emails is great, but its just not worth billions of dollars.

I want to be clear, from an academic perspective these things are fascinating and very very cool! You can teach a computer to talk like a person might simply by having it read all the books! But there is not a business reason to have this. Not at the current costs. Maybe LLMs are a step we need to get actually useful AI tools, but as currently constituted its just not there.

The killer app of LLMs is how its gonna kill the industry when the investments fail to make the expected return. A lot of people are gonna lose their jobs when managers try to replace them with AI, and even more are gonna lose their jobs when that doesn't work and all those companies go under, and there's another tech bubble burst

the people rooting out "wasteful" "corruption" are child Nazis who have very close ties to Satanic CSAM extortionist crime rings. Not an exaggeration. These people should be in jail, let alone have admin access over the Treasury payment systems.

also, none of the "data" they've released has supported their claims. they are lying and corrupt and doing treason of the highest order. Even Jefferson Davis and Benedict Arnold would be appalled.

[flagged]

you already had Boris Johnson and Liz Truss. what more immiseration could you really be hoping for

its not an honest question. what is happening is so clearly and obviously illegal and unconstitutional that literal children understand it.

They are looking for The Cathedral.

No way a 19 year old could be tricked by a pretty woman into giving her secrets and access codes. Real level-headed and clear-eyed age

In a just world, these kids will end up in jail for a long time, and Musk for the rest of his life. In a less just world, well, I don't want to get banned

what are you talking about? this statement of yours does not match reality in any way

No, I don't think it helps the govt. I don't think it was necessary. Motions, especially early ones like this, often have a lot of things in them that aren't necessary because they throw all their arguments at the wall and hope some of them stick. That's how it goes. This is likely a case of one of the DoL lawyers with a bone to pick who found a place to basically go "and another thing!"

grifting is easy if you have no shame and no conscience

this is not an actual argument in the case. this argument is just an aside in a footnote.

the government is actually arguing that the Department of Labor is allowed to issue fines and require companies to pay back wages when they steal from their employees and lie on visa applications

and their ideology is dismantling the administrative state

no one ever reads the actual complaint, smh.

If any of you read the governments actual motion instead of the bad faith article, you'd see first of all that this "argument" of the government is an aside in a footnote, and not that relevant to their case. Which is that this lawn care company stole wages from its workers and lied on visa applications. The footnote is basically an aside about how philosophically sometimes you can't think of money as property, because it makes some other procedures like taxes difficult. It's not a load-bearing argument at all.

Reason magazine are libertarian cranks who want to get rid of the administrative state, which is what this case is actually about anyways. Basically this is an appeal to a determination by a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge where the lawn care company is saying its unconstitutional to have administrative courts. The government is saying no its not (its not) and also you should have brought this up sometime in the last 4 years this case was being heard by the DoL, and also you would have lost in an article 3 court anyways, because you cheated your employees and lied on visa applications.

Edit: ALSO, this is not a case from the Department of Justice, as the article (written by an attorney!) states, but it's the Department of Labor. I know its a nitpick but come on!

what sucks here is we don't even know if a murderer went free, because the cops didn't do their jobs and prove this guy was the murderer. it's not letting a guy free on a technicality, it's making sure the cops do their jobs correctly. it's protecting our rights.

sorry, we do know a murderer went free. we just don't know if this guy was the murderer who went free, or an innocent man who's name was dragged through the mud cause a cop was lazy

They can remember O(1) passwords, but they need O(n) passwords

I can speak to my experience as the child raised multilingually, though not quite the same situation you are proposing. I was raised in the US to a an American dad and a French mom, and they both speak both languages. My parents decided they would only speak to me and my younger brother in French, assuming (luckily correctly!) that I would learn English by simply being in an English-speaking world. My experience, and I think my parents and their multi-lingual friends would agree, is consistency. My parents even went so far as to pretend not to understand us if we spoke to them in English! Not even to ask for a word translation! If you speak English, you always speak English. If your spouse speaks Spanish, they always speak Spanish. My feeling as a recipient of this education is that its probably better if you both speak the same language to your children, but I know that splitting them up can also work. Again, the key is consistency, and the simpler you can make the rules about who speaks what language the better.

I guess small claims court is one way to force a real person to respond. Seems like a class-action opportunity is lurking here for an enterprising/clever attorney

well, its not harming society, its harming the lender. we obviously want to have protections against people taking advantage, but ultimately its up to the lender to make sure that the borrower has a realistic plan to pay back the loan, at least within whatever risk parameters they are willing to accept. In the end, its a tradeoff, the US has higher new business formation, especially from less well-off members of society, but more of those businesses fail.

well, thats the risk the bank takes when they lend my business the money, that I might not be able to pay it all back. they eat the loss, minus whatever they can recover from assets left over. and I get a mark that says you should think twice before lending me money for a restaurant again. but my life isnt ruined. i get to keep my house, i can still participate in financial society. the alternative is, as someone else pointed out, only those with lots of resources can afford to try to create new businesses. the US policy is that its worth it to have a more lenient bankruptcy process, with more bankruptcies that are less ruinous, since it leads to more risk taking (ie new business formation).

GroverhausAI, coming to a neighborhood near you soon!

If I go to open a restaurant and I can convince a bank to lend me capital to start the business, and then it fails, I can see an argument for why they shouldnt lend me money to open a second restaurant, at least not right away. But why should I be penalized in personal life for a business failing. Should the bank get to take my house if my restaurant fails? Should I be prevented from getting a credit card?

Look, the denial created at least one extra job! Cigna is out there creating jobs, and it only cost you the very real fear that you could have your life ruined from a broken leg!

- twenty years (this is forbidden by the laws of physics)

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years. The second best time is now.

So to with nuclear power and other long term projects. Just because we needed these things built yesterday should not stop us from building them now.

But what if you have roommates? Like, what if I live in a 3 bedroom apt. I don't want to have a family plan with my roommates just so I don't get a stalking notification about my friends backpack being left in his bedroom. There are lot's of situations where non-traditional household arrangements make the 24 hour notice will be a real pain. You should be able to add other iCloud accounts to ignore specific tags, or something like that.