ptrhvns

Yes, I'd be interested.

I know what you're saying about their perspective, but the real equation does include the workers. One possible result of being ignorant of that fact is there could be blood on the streets.

It might be a false choice. Why not find a way to balance, as best you can, both broad experiences and diving deeply into their primary gifts?

I'm not sure that "a majority of American voters selected them" is true. Gerrymandering and other corrupting influences are a serious problem in America.

Assembly is generally generated deterministically. LLM code is not.

If Veritasium (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mScpHTIi-kM) is right, tit-for-tat with a little extra forgiveness to break downward spirals is a little better.

That's not what's happening. Using your analogy, you're reading the book, remembering it, and then making N more books (maybe for commercial purposes) by using what you remembered to create something very similar in terms of style, prose, plot, and so on. As a result, the person who you learned from can't get a job writing anymore because their work has been commoditized. Also, they're feeling lost because the work they devoted their lives to is now awash in a sea of similar work.

Well, except there are 14 characteristics being reviewed, so is this still true?

Just a thought: avoiding political bias could it's own form of bias. I would think the goal is mostly to get "correct" answers based on facts, logic, and so on. If a "correct" answer can be computed (what does that mean with an LLM?), then it might be biased, but still desirable.

If others are having this issue, I deleted all forms of local storage (cookies, IndexDB, etc.) for the mail.google.com site, and that seems to have fixed the issue. It might be relevant that this happened after I upgraded Firefox.

"The Case Against Reality" by Donald D. Hoffman

I can't even ...

It seems to be very bad right now. Check out this data from Indeed:

https://data.indeed.com/#/postings

Select the "Sector" tab, and check the "IT Operations & Helpdesk" and "Software Development" options under the "Sector" dropdown.

Spending time with my kids, and guitar.

Indeed. Cost optimization is one of the “6 Pillars of the AWS Well-Architected Framework” as promoted by AWS themselves:

“The Cost Optimization pillar includes the ability to run systems to deliver business value at the lowest price point.”

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/wellarchitected/latest/framework...

I think Vimium C works better than Vimium. It's been so long since I switched that I can't remember exactly why, though.

In what ways is it superior to Vimium?

FYI: the Linux installation script for Ollama works in the "standard" style for tooling these days:

    curl https://ollama.ai/install.sh | sh

However, that script asks for root-level privileges via sudo the last time I checked. So, if you want the tool, you may want to download the script and have a look at it, or modify it depending on your needs.

If we're going to talk about construction as the metaphor, then it's done by the computer (e.g. compilation), and it's so cheap or trivial on many projects that developers will ask the computer to build the software hundreds or thousands a times a day (e.g. via test-driven development). In this metaphor, I think the developer would be more akin to a designer or architect, but where the building in question is at least partially novel. If it's not novel in product, people, process, etc., then the client could just go out and buy or use one that has already been produced. The developer wouldn't be necessary.

I think the fundamental misunderstanding is that we aren’t building a product. We are doing research and development. We are figuring out how to build something novel, otherwise the customer could just go out and buy it already. Once we’re done with discovery, the computer builds it. So, the customer is like any other who is paying for research and development. It’s not a blank check, but they should go into it without the expectation that something new will be discovered on some accurate schedule.

No one is suggesting that we just pause and that's it. The pause is to give safety researchers time to do their work. Since progress is outpacing safety research, if we don't pause, we will eventually reach the cliff without a way to protect ourselves, for better or worse.

"It was beautiful. We were selling rich women their own fat asses back to them." -- Fight Club

Universal Darwinism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Darwinism

I don't think this applies. The proverb is a warning to those who haven't obtained enlightenment yet about how their daily, external life won't change once they do. The OP is saying they never obtained the promised enlightenment.

Edit: clarity

Here's my method:

Plan -> Study -> Practice -> Model

# Plan

Set a small, specific goal. Brainstorm topics which might help. Research if experts agree with topics.

Classify topics: conceptual - deeply understand; factual - memorize, little understanding; procedural - practice, little thought.

Qualities of concepts: three Rs - read, recognize, react; many paths to a good result; highly flexible, agile, interactive; recognizing patterns instantly; overcoming complex obstacles; making smart, timely choices.

Qualities of facts or procedures: ABC - always be correct; few or one path to an ideal result; imagine the performance of a reliable robot.

Find good learning resources for each topic. Try to match topic classification. Try to find all learning modes (see, hear, do). Research thoroughly. Good resources save time. Emphasize or exclude parts based on goal.

Brainstorm obstacles. Find ways to overcome those obstacles.

# Study

Review prerequisites before studying. Break learning resources into chunks.

Prepare to study a chunk: preview relevant exercises and tests; scan major elements of content; generate questions from scan.

Study a chunk: consume content; try to use all learning modes (see, hear, do); take notes, and highlight key parts; answer questions from scan along the way.

Improve chunk retention and comprehension: do free recall (no prompts); consolidate notes and highlights; do active recall (exercises and tests); connect it with other knowledge; try to teach it to an imaginary student; utilize spaced-repetition.

Repeat process with next chunk. Add practice when knowledge can become skill.

# Practice

Structure practice with scrimmages and drills.

Scrimmage: good for concepts; open-ended attempt in a realistic scenario; projects, immersion, simulations; replicate complexity and uncertainty of reality; focus on making a high number of varied reps; aggressively explore and experiment.

Drill: good for facts or procedures; use the REPS method; size: proficiency within 1-3 sessions; repeat and master a chunk before moving on.

The REPS method: R - reaching and repeating; E - engagement; P - purposefulness; S - strong feedback.

Reaching: challenging, ~85% success rate.

Strong feedback: immediate; concise; accurate; direct; actionable.

Common drills: time slice - small sequence in longer one; copycat - copy in irrelevant parts; magnifying glass - one aspect among many.

# Model

Find and steal from experts. Study examples of excellent work. What are the specific, critical elements? How do experts perform differently than I do? Identify process, performance, and results.

Edit: formatting

If you have a disciplined, experienced team; good documentation; good coverage with automated tests; good linting; good code organization; the team avoids clever coding (e.g. lots of meta-programming), and you're comfortable leaning on UNIX as a larger part of your IDE, then it's not too bad. Of course, everything is a tradeoff. You may find that some things with dynamic typing become easier, or possible that weren't before.

Good question. I was thinking of full projects, coded by a single individual.

Front end: TypeScript, Vite, React, FontAwesome, Radix UI, lodash, React Router, zod, SCSS.

Back end: Python, mypy, Django, Django REST Framework, Celery, Redis, PostgreSQL

What failure modes, biases, or false negatives does this method suffer from?

This is incorrect. It’s not hypothetical, is fully possible, and is very much in the scientific arena. Evolutionary game theory, among other tools, has been used to demonstrate that it's highly probably that human beings do not perceive objective reality as it truly is. See “The Case Against Reality” by Donald Hoffman.

Edit: more precise language.

Maybe this would help: https://usesummit.com/.