hellojomp

It hurts me that 160 sound visualizations later I am less interested in sound than I would've been with one, just one, compelling viz.

My Mom was worried I wouldn't finish my thesis so instead of encouraging me she encouraged an LLM. She says now I don't have to worry about submitting a proof anymore, there is a counter-example.

This is the state of affairs today and how everyday people will talk about it.

We are so starved for aura we have to farm into the future now, I too would like to dine.

We are now in a weird middle ground where we want to write things OCR algorithms have trouble transcribing which also means we write things people with accessibility issues have trouble seeing. No child left behind?

If you can get a cautionary tale on having children out of this article, your powers of interpretation are immense or you didn’t read the article at all…

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times” why bother reading the rest of the story

So let it be. Why don't we build another place for our memories to go? Why don't we build the _unstructured_ internet, where the intelligence is not in the mind but in the eye and the pleasure is in finding not in disseminating?

This is really neat!

A question I had about QR codes:

Let’s say I want to produce a QR code that is as close as possible to an image (let’s say the Nike swoosh logo), if I just added that to the center and added the 3 orientation markers on the corners it wouldn’t be a proper QR code yet, my question is what is the minimal amount of edits I would need to do from that symbol to get a valid QR code?

I’m thinking of something like people buying and hoarding domains in early 00’s (even now), if I could generate the minimal QR code (minimal is important here in the same way that .com is treated as superior to .ca or .net) of well-known symbols and buy the resulting domain it points to (if it even points to a domain) couldn’t I sell this to companies with the associated domain as a re-direct as well?

He's not the man we deserve but he's the man we need.

He's got beauty, he's got grace, it's Mark Carney against the States.

Making everyone say "Mmmmmmmmmmmmm...ark (Carney)".

Noah built an ark, we got ourselves a Mark.

You can take my Karma, but you can never take my Carney. (I know, I know you actually can: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinations_by_the_...)

Does that answer your question?

“The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of.” - Pascal

I like this quote because sooner or later, one discovers it for themselves

At first I was gonna say that if a person prefers the response of an A.I. to yours it is a reflection of your own lack of understanding, articulation, effective communication, etc.

Then I remembered a passage from 'Never Split The Difference' by Voss (a book on negotiation) which went something like:

If you can get a person to "You're right" you haven't done anything. If you can get them to "That's right" you've hit the sweet spot.

When you prompt an A.I. you have pre-conditioned the answer on something which came from yourself. There is something about this which turns what would normally be a "You're (the LLM) right" to a "That's right" and that something is an implicit desire toward "I'm right".

Side note: In 'The Dawn of Everything' there is an interesting passage about the notion of private property arising from the idea that injecting some of yourself (labor) into a thing (land) makes the thing an extension of yourself (property). Doesn't this logic extend to this kind of psychosis? The C-suite's aren't deffering to A.I. they are deffering to themselves via A.I.

We are so ******, am I right?

> “if the cost of a resource goes up, the total spend on that resource can go down”

This is tautologically true in the limiting case of infinite cost.

A significant leap in logic is my middle name :) (I am not an AI)

I wonder, when you have a McDonald's McDouble, do you really care how it was made or do you just care that it's yummeroni and costs $2.99?

On the topic of taste, I think of this quote in Susan Sontag's "Notes On 'Camp'" often:

“For taste governs every free — as opposed to rote — human response. Nothing is more decisive. There is taste in people, visual taste, taste in emotion — and there is taste in acts, taste in morality. Intelligence, as well, is really a kind of taste: taste in ideas. (One of the facts to be reckoned with is that taste tends to develop very unevenly. It's rare that the same person has good visual taste and good taste in people and taste in ideas.)

Taste has no system and no proofs. But there is something like a logic of taste: the consistent sensibility which underlies and gives rise to a certain taste. A sensibility is almost, but not quite, ineffable. Any sensibility which can be crammed into the mold of a system, or handled with the rough tools of proof, is no longer a sensibility at all. It has hardened into an idea..."

Less is a way to signal more, like restaurants which only have 5-6 options available, the impression is they have less so they must be doing more with what they have.

Also, it unifies people around a book making a natural environment for book clubs to emerge from and it reduces the anxiety of pretending to look at the selection when you have already decided not to buy.

What a great idea!

The next level of this is Ukraine street maps where you run virtual war campaigns on real streets using drones.