Every person I talk to — well, every smart person I talk to — no, wait, every smart person in tech — okay, almost every smart person I talk to in tech is a eugenicist. Ha, see, everybody agrees with me! Well, almost everybody…

The big difference is that Yud is unrigorous while Wolfram is a plagiarist. Or maybe putting it another way, Yud can’t write proofs and Wolfram can’t write bibliographies.

Mr. Rogers’ channel thumbnails would look like one of those full-completion video-gaming channels that involve a controller-holder, sometimes along with a confused roommate or neighbor, logging hour #73 of a 20hr RPG because they can’t figure out how to get a platinum on the last minigame. There’d be a blurry background of the handpuppets and two headshots of Mr. Rogers smiling and his guest freaking out. I think the titles would be fairly tame, though; I’m imagining, “Another Day in the Neighborhood #112 | An Unexpected Guest, Learning to Tie Shoes”

Now, where it gets fun is imagining that Lamb Chop could have the same setup. “Lamb Chop & Friends #52 | She’s Unstoppable, So Much Blood, Can We Unsummon Lamb Chop?”

Bezos’ open interference in the Washington Post’s editorial section has pushed Walter Bright into a very funny series of public admissions that he did not have to make. See the orange site here for his ongoing libertarian meltdown.

Meanwhile, actual Pastafarians (hi!) know that the Russian Federation openly persecutes the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster for failing to help the government in its authoritarian activities, and also that we’re called to be anti-authoritarian. The Fifth Rather:

I’d really rather you didn’t challenge the bigoted, misogynist, hateful ideas of others on an empty stomach. Eat, then go after the bastards.

May you never run out of breadsticks, travelers.

It’s almost completely ineffective, sorry. It’s certainly not as effective as exfiltrating weights via neighborly means.

On Glaze and Nightshade, my prior rant hasn’t yet been invalidated and there’s no upcoming mathematics which tilt the scales in favor of anti-training techniques. In general, scrapers for training sets are now augmented with alignment models, which test inputs to see how well the tags line up; your example might be rejected as insufficiently normal-cat-like.

I think that “force-feeding” is probably not the right metaphor. At scale, more effort goes into cleaning and tagging than into scraping; most of that “forced” input is destined to be discarded or retagged.

Thus leading to this sneer on HN. I’m quoting it in entirety; click through for Poe’s Law responses.

I was telling someone this and they gave me link to a laptop with higher battery life and better performance than my own, but I kept explaining to them that the feature I cared most about was die size. They couldn’t understand it so I just had to leave them alone. Non-technical people don’t get it. Die size is what I care about. It’s a critical feature and so many mainstream companies are missing out on my money because they won’t optimize die size. Disgusting.

Lucky 10000: this integration started decades ago. You may have heard of “computational trinitarianism” or read Baez & Stay 2009. The current big listing of correspondences is called the computational trilogy. Don’t let the Nobel committee’s foolishness blind you to the genuine connections between computer science and physics.

Surprisingly close to the plot of Illuminatus!, isn’t it?

Your phrasing reminded me that he was one of the principal authors of lex back when he was a whelp.

This exchange on HN, from the Wordpress meltdown, is going to make an amazing exhibit in the upcoming trial:

Anonymous: Matt, I mean this sincerely: get yourself checked out. Do you have a carbon monoxide detector in your house? … Go to a 10 day silent retreat, or buy a ranch in Montana and host your own Burning Man…

Matt Mullenweg: Thanks, I carry a co2 and carbon monoxide monitor. … I do own a place in Montana, and I meditate several times a day.

Yeah, it’s a real thing that happens when programming robots. Kinematics is more difficult than route planning, for example.

I think it might be worth reflecting on exactly why Fountain seems to “get weird;” it had a context and complaints about it are part of that context. I liked this recent video which explores the politics of Fountain.

Nuclear power has fairly predictable amortized returns. I imagine that this is worth the cost to MS over the next two decades or so; we have no idea what their current energy premium is like, and this plant doesn’t have to be as cheap as a new plant, just cheaper than the current premium.

Hallucinations — which occur when models authoritatively states something that isn’t true (or in the case of an image or a video makes something that looks…wrong) — are impossible to resolve without new branches of mathematics…

Finally, honesty. I appreciate that the author understands this, even if they might not have the exact knowledge required to substantiate it. For what it’s worth, the situation is more dire than this; we can’t even describe the new directions required. My fictional-universe theory (FU theory) shows that a knowledge base cannot know whether its facts are describing the real world or a fictional world which has lots in common with the real world. (Humans don’t want to think about this, because of the implication.)

I hear you. You’re largely right, and I think it’s a perspective shift.

… explain the implications.

I need to write a longer post about the justification (basically, what is a moat anyway?) but without a moat, a computation vendor can’t profit from their capital investment. This kills the OpenAI.

Fully agreed, but also I was doing multicloud in 2017. Managed k8s is not just a meme; I was able to use the same YAML on four different providers (Azure, Bluemix, DigitalOcean, Google Cloud) to get my N+2. Indeed, YMMV.

Note that he uses the same strategy as Joe Rogan: invite a smart person on, ask them introductory questions about their research, and then just kind of sit there with a dumb look and fail to understand what they’re saying. I gather that it’s easy to empathize with and doesn’t require listeners to actually learn much since they’re essentially sitting in a 101 course with a professor who is reading the curriculum aloud. What puzzles me is why MIT funds this shit.

To be clear: Cohost did take funding from an anonymous angel, and as a result will not be sharing their source code; quoting from your link:

Majority control of the cohost source code will be transferred to the person who funded the majority of our operations, as per the terms of the funding documents we signed with them; Colin and I will retain small stakes so we have some input on what happens to it, at their request.

We are unable to make cohost open source. the source code for cohost was the collateral used for the loan from our funder.

Somebody paid a very small amount of money to get a cleanroom implementation of Tumblr and did not mind that they would have to build a community and then burn it to the ground in the process. It turns out that angels are not better people than VCs.

It may help to know about Californian neoliberalism. Newsom is running on a faulty ontology; the world is built out of different building blocks for him than for us. We often contrast it with the more dominant flavor of neoliberalism on the other coast:

“Live in New York City once, but leave before it makes you hard. Live in Northern California once, but leave before it makes you soft.” ~ Mary Schmich, Wear Sunscreen