spongebobstoes

buy two? three? redundancy makes for good reliability

I want modern medicine, renewable energy, etc. the world keeps getting better.

thanks, I think this is the most important point in your defense

thanks for your explanation. I'd love to see a concise explanation of the difference in benchmark performance between -preview and -beta

that would help clear the air, if the full-sql version has similar performance to the partial-sql version

many open source projects do not have code review

besides, there was a time before code review was the norm

code review isn't why programs are correct. careful testing is

why does someone have to read it?

we don't read the assembly code produced by the compiler, nor do we read the code of all open source dependencies, yet we can successfully build software

the claims of plagiarism are not convincing, and gatekeeping knowledge is a bad look

if they don't want to write anymore, that's okay, they don't owe it to anybody

but I will disagree with the rationale

I want enable and empower everyone, even though it includes bad actors, because I know it includes good actors

I believe that on balance, humans, the world, the future, are all good

I reject misanthropy and pessimism

let's not make everything worse under the guise of equality. perpetuating injustice does not somehow create justice

copyright sucks. it stifles individual creativity and serves to enrich big corporations

democratic elections give power to the people without requiring labor, it's one of the pillars of western society

my point is that evaluating reading comprehension is typically done as a test, and test taking is not a valuable skill

the evidence is that individual workers are more productive than ever, and this trend has continued since long before the 1970s. this is despite any measured decline in reading comprehension

the older generations are obviously not propping up the world economy through their singular reading skills

how is "worse at reading" evaluated?

test taking is not a valuable skill. it's mostly pattern matching against the question

people need new skills in a new age. the education system hasn't even kept pace with the existence of the internet, let alone AI

idk who DHH is and I don't know (or care) what their opinions are

Omarchy is a free OS, and it looks very interesting

I don't think it's wrong to avoid it because of DHH's opinions, but I don't think it's right to either

the organizer cared enough to make and distribute a poster, and they were small enough to not hire a marketing firm

those are the hallmarks of the community events you claim to want

this is a great blog post, documenting a very real process of what it's like to create large results with fallible models

though I am an expert at coding, the author's process sounds very similar. constantly double checking, asking for explanations, having AI adversarially check its own work, trying to detect bullshit

where does more money to pay a better legal team not help?

bigger spender already has a huge advantage, up to millions of dollars

this is more likely to democratize the legal system by reducing the cost of a good legal team

> it will just make a lot of the things we are doing much more expensive. Software engineering is an early victim of that

I replied to the author's claim that software engineering is more expensive now because of AI

regardless, AI hasn't made it more expensive to manufacture RAM. the price will decrease as the supply chain catches up

the author claims that AI makes things more expensive. in my experience, $200/month is a small price for such a productivity increase

the author also speculates without reason that tokens are discounted, and subscriptions lose money. I'm sure that subs are cheaper than API prices, but I bet they both have positive unit economics

using AI makes an individual more capable and empowered. this views AI as an accessible tool, like AWS or a nail gun

individual empowerment threatens institutions

with AI, one person can accomplish much more

collaboration adds overhead, but expands what's possible. need to think bigger to continue to see the benefits

I think this is mathematicians coming to grips with the fact that AI is surpassing them

we will all have this moment soon enough, and it will change how we think about intelligence, identity and value

thanks for diving in, though I don't find the reasons convincing as I will briefly enumerate

ads fund access for poor people. Ant has a different philosophy, not a better one. Altman was supported by >90% of employees. OAI DoW deal includes technical safeguards against misuse (missing from Ant deal). Loopt and WorldCoin dont seem terrible or even relevant, Altman doesn't even have OAI equity

I don't think OAI are the "good guys", but I don't see convincing evidence that they are terrible

same, I'm a paying user in the US

what makes the company so terrible?

OAI didn't try to claim Buckmaster's work as their own. OAI tried to let Buckmaster present OAI's work. it is nearly the opposite of your accusation

it seems like OAI tried to share, but didn't want to share with an Ant employee. a bit childish, but understandable to want to avoid a headline "Anthropic researcher solves Millennium problem"

it seems like Buckmaster got one-upped and is upset. understandable, but I find their reaction childish as well

just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean it's not true

that is not related to the accusation that they literally stole Buckmaster's work, which seems baseless

I don't agree with the oil claim analogy. this is knowledge, freely given to the world. not something hoarded by a corporation