rxtexit

I spend a ridiculous amount of time at my job on emails.

I use claude and chatGPT all the time but I just don't see how language models can help me with email.

Typing the words is never the bottleneck.

The problem is trying to express what needs to be expressed with such clarity as to not cause any misunderstanding and then more email.

Summarizing an old, long thread could have some value but that is such an edge case.

I would be the main customer for this type of product but I just don't see much value in it at all.

I also think it is what you say when you are traveling, living off your trust fund.

Instead of going to Phish concerts, raves or pretending be a professional poker player, the 2020s version is/was to be a digital nomad "entrepreneur".

It is easy to make a vlog or podcast no one watches or listens to anywhere.

This thing looks like a complete joke next to the Unreal Engine.

Yes, it basically changes to men complaining about women. The people with a good sex life end up becoming therapists for the group.

Mixed groups on the other hand turn into a soap opera.

What is needed is a strong common interest that binds the group beyond these tendencies to stave off the soap opera entropy. The soap opera entropy will always increase with time though until the group dissolves.

It is still more stable though than the misogynist entropy.

You should read the book of the same name by Eric Hoffer.

It is an incredible book and a crime it is not a standard text in education.

Yes, as an American who is an absolute minimalist, people here own so much junk.

It is not just well off people, it is practically everyone. Everyone has an enormous amount of junk. Well off people just have more pricey junk.

I think many people just settled in while we had no real technological change for 15 years. Real change, not an update to a web framework.

When I graduated high school, I had never been or knew anyone who had ever been on the internet at all. The internet was this vague "information superhighway" that I didn't know really what to make of.

If you are of a certain age though you would think a pointless update to react was all the change ever coming.

That time is over and we are back to reality.

IMO it is a mixture of stupidity and denial.

I am not a software engineer but I just can't imagine my job is not automated in 10 years or less.

10 years is about the time between King – Man + Woman = Queen and now.

I think what is being highly underestimated is the false sense of security people feel because the jobs they interface with are also not automated, yet.

It is not hard to picture the network of automation that once one role is automated, connected roles to that role become easier to automate. So on and so on while the models keep getting stronger at the same time.

I expect we will have a recession at some point and the jobs lost are gone forever.

I just doubt all this is true though.

It all seems like the same Utopian thinking any way you cut it. It makes for good fiction books because we can't see the actual counterfactual.

The simpler explanation to me would be it wouldn't matter if you had a religious or secular society. Just different trade offs on the long march of progress.

People 80 years from now will live better lives than we do today. That is just the way it goes. Of course if you asked anyone during WW2 this 80 years ago about 2025 they would give a highly pessimistic answer about 2025.

I completely understand what you are saying but ip does make an interesting point.

Why would chain of thought work at all if the model wasn't gaining something by additional abstraction away from binary?

Maybe things even go in the other direction and the models evolve a language more abstract than English that we also can't understand.

The models will still need to interface though with humans using human language until we become some kind of language model pet dog.

Imagine packing 50,000 elephants inside a football stadium.

Humans have a unique ability to scale up a network of brains without complete hell breaking lose.

In other words, creating a model that has little to do with reality then sampling from it to come up with a result that has little to do with reality.

Yes, I think this is kind of standard practice in many fields.

If someone questions this just quote "all models are wrong, but some are useful" as if the quote is actually saying "all models are wrong, but all models are useful".

Yes, this is the nature of being spoiled rotten.

I am not a software engineer and have never felt stable in my 30 year career.

It always feels like the rug could get pulled out from under me at any time.

So what? It is still better than working in coal mine. It is still more interesting than working at a gas station.

Hard to feel sorry for people basically complaining the work ping pong table doesn't have quite the quality ping pong balls they were expecting.

It is an interesting mix of being both super elitist and completely infantile at the same time.

I am Gen X and fully expect to be working until 70, hopefully.

I knew a guy who worked full time at a bank at 85. He said all the time he didn't have to work but what else was he going to do all day? A big reason he was able bodied at 85 was from working and not sitting home all day.

I think we have confused retirement fund/planning marketing with reality.

The retired people I know are physical mess from retirement. Alcohol and restaurant food all the time, will be needing long term care much sooner than if they had worked longer.

My boomer parents are already pushing being retired for 20 years, neither did anything more than the bare minimum in life.

They could have easily worked 10 years longer instead of doing nothing but drinking wine all day and/or going out to restaurants in retirement. That is in between traveling to go out to restaurants and/or drink wine.

The boomers scammed us all and aren't done yet. They are going to make sure to bankrupt the entire system with healthcare cost before they go.

Then you obviously didn't listen to a word Chomsky has said on the subject.

I was quite dismissive of him on LLMs until I realized the utter hubris and stupidity of dismissing Chomsky on language.

I think it was someone asking if he was familiar with the Wittgenstein Blue and Brown books and of course because he as already an assistant professor at MIT when they came out.

I still chuckle at my own intellectual arrogance and stupidity when thinking about how I was dismissive of Chomsky on language. I barely know anything and I was being dismissive of one of unquestionable titans and historic figures of a field.

It really shouldn't be hard to understand that a titan of a field has forgot more than what an arm chair enthusiast knows.

I remember having thoughts like this until I listened to him talk on a podcast for 3 hours about chatGPT.

What was most obvious is Chomsky really knows linguistics and I don't.

"What Kind of Creatures Are We?" is good place to start.

We should take having Chomsky still around to comment on LLMs as one of the greatest intellectual gifts.

Much before listening to his thoughts on LLMs was me projecting my disdain for his politics.

It probably takes the smallest amount of interaction with you to tell you are absolutely brilliant.

I am self taught and wouldn't hire myself to write anything software wise.

For the average person, a degree is to signal a person is at least not me.

At least smart enough to get through 4 years of CS.

If someone is upper level brilliant it is hard to not come out on top no matter what path they take.

That doesn't scale though for the average person and many are self deluded in their abilities.

I have experienced this for various libraries. I think it helps to paste in a package.json in the prompt.

All the models seem to struggle with React three fiber like this. Mixing and matching versions that don't make sense. I can see this being a tough problem given the nature of these models and the training data.

I am going to also try to start giving it a better skeleton to start with and stick to the particular imports when faced with this issue.

My very first prompt with claude 4 was for R3F and it imported a depreciated component as usual.

We can't expect the model to read our minds.

The whole idea of a "killer app" is stupid.

It is a dismissive rhetorical device to prove a wrong point on an internet forum such as this that has nothing to do with reality.

"I don't have anything to ask the model, so the model hasn't improved"

Brilliant!

I am pretty much ready to be done talking to human idiots on the internet. It is just so boring after talking to these models.

You mean the same people that built the CIA and NSA?

You are literally talking about the founders of the surveillance state.

I think it is more like giving someone a swiss army knife and they complain it won't even cut a piece of wood because their role in society is being compensated for cutting wood. All they know how to do is cut wood. They aren't even interested in anything but cutting wood.

This swiss army knife is totally useless!

Its worse than this. It doesn't matter if a human understands recency bias, the availability heuristic or the halo effect.

It will still change the decision. It doesn't matter if you "understand" these concepts or not. Or you use some other bias or heuristic to over correct the previous bias or heuristic you think you understand.

This topic people I think tend to confuse outright discrimination with the much more subtle bias and heuristics a human uses for judgement under uncertainty.

The interview process really shows how much closer we are to medieval people than what we believe ourselves to be.

Picking a candidate based on the patterns of chicken guts wouldn't be much less random and might even be more fair.

I just think the entire framing is wrong.

I have done quite a bit with AI generated audio/sound/music.

At some point in the process, the end result feels like your own and the models were used to create material for the end work.

At some point, using AI in the creative process will be such a given that it is left unsaid.

I would assume the screen play next year that wins the Oscar will have been helped with the aid of a language model. I can't imagine a writer not using a language model to riff on ideas. The delusional idea here is the prompt "write an Oscar winning screenplay" and that somehow that is all there is going to the creative process.

"Rap isn't even music, they aren't even singing!"

Rap is really the best example of how stupid these discussions are.

The language models are amazing at rhyming so by the logic then anyone can become a rapper and that is going to put current rappers out of business.

Only someone who has never tried to rap could possibly believe this. Same thing with images, same thing with music, same thing with literally everything involving human creativity.