everydayentropy

Nice read. It was touching and it's great that credit is given where credit is due now.

I'll take this one step further.

What if you're able to pinpoint unique loci for an individual or group which can serve as a target of a highly specific bio-weapon? Do you think genomic bio-weapons aren't being explored as future weapons?

If only they could regenerate them for my head :(

Poe's law.

If it's not a troll post, I hope the founder gets a solid dose of reality. I mean, if he doesn't take comments like yours to heart and reflects on the absurdity of his worldview, then the narcissism runs deep in that one.

Socialization is far more important than any other skill that a child learns in primary and even secondary education.

I don't see ever see the wide adoption of an AI homeschooling solution coming to fruition due to this fact.

If it takes writers as long as this article's author to get to the point, no wonder we have reading buckets/backlogs/rivers/whatever.

People optimize for search engines, not brevity and therein lies the problem.

Be concise and communicate your idea. That should be the North Star of writers.

I'll raise you.

The FTC is not only stifling innovation by strong-arming companies which produce these tools to limit their capabilities. They're potentially running afoul of the first amendment by imposing restrictions on IP and thus speech.

Can go a step further and consider the 1A protections of generative output.

Yup! I always thought it was me staying inside more as I got older, but I rarely see butterflies and bumble bees anymore.

This terrifies me more than climate alarmism.

Call me a Luddite.

No. AI is not the oracle at Delphi.

How is withdrawing your cash before everyone else withdraws their cash irrational? It's the Nash equilibrium.

This comment is a prime example of how the non-technical founder understands the world.

Proprietary systems are company IP. Talking about the design of the system is protected by the NDA, which the exercise described above is asking the candidate to do.

You hire for the skills to develop your own proprietary system. The employer doesn't own the skill. The employer owns anything those skills produced for the employer.

You wouldn't want your employees giving the recipe to your secret sauce away to your competitor, right? That's what everyone is talking about.

I think it's meant to be Roman numeral abbreviation for a thousand-thousand. You would think MM would be two thousand following the convention, but it's multiplicative like 10^6.

I have trouble trusting information from sources that aren't self-critical or aware of the conversation associated with the research they're citing.

And probably hypocritically, I also want to kick back, turn off the critical side of my brain and enjoy the lectures and get some learning for free while not questioning every claim. Edutainment so to speak. But that requires a lot of trust, and if that trust seems threatened, I can't in good conscience continue my lazy learning.

P(A|B) != P(B|A)

Logically, it's affirming the consequent.

I have this thing when lecturers are engaging that I have even more trouble believing them going forward if they make an error.

I came to that point about the cycle synchronization in his lecture series and I had to stop. Not entirely because of the error, but because the phenomenon he cited was controversial well before he gave those lectures. That tells me he was not one to a) update his beliefs b) predisposed to falsifying his beliefs/seeking out contrary evidence or c) acknowledge disagreement about a phenomenon

Any one or combination of those qualities makes me skeptical when one is teaching a "science". So rather than spend the rest of the series second guessing everything he said, I stopped watching. It's a shame, he's really a great lecturer.

"Until they're in it" totally is a phrase that makes sense and I would say can be idiomatic.

OP if you read my previous comment, then that does not apply to the phrase that ethanbond corrected.

This phrase doesn't make sense at all stand alone. I couldn't find the context either.

Safe to say that no, not idiomatic. And if you use this phrase as quoted people will be very confused and have no idea what you're trying to communicate.

Have you tried overleaf?

Can't you see that people in this thread are posting ChatGPT responses...