why would the terminal not say "completed in 30 minutes" even if it's only really 5 minutes of real work and 25 minutes of thumbs twiddling? If your agentic-harness provider is in bed or just the same as your LLM provider, that is the rational `best` case scenario/timeline. for them.
Well, be careful what you wish for.
At least I was able to stop reading that thing pretty quickly: it's not unreadable, it's untrustable!
...and yes, adding non-LLMish malapropisms has become my Captcha...
Looks interesting (added to my list, thank you for the recommendation), but not actually relevant to the topic at hand.
We know that the brain is a probabilistic input → output machine because the universe is a probabilistic input → output machine. The brain is made of universe. There are deterministic relationships (which at high sensitivity or complexity become easier to describe as probabilistic), and quantum relationships. That's it. The brain, like every other thing comprised of "universe" is comprised of those two types of relationships.
If Romain's book provides evidence of relationships in the brain that are neither quantum (therefore random) NOR classical (therefore deterministic), then 1) he would have already won at least one Nobel prize, and 2) anyone in this thread would be able to at least gesture toward what relationship that is.
This is a vacuous argument. If everything is a “probabilistic input output machine” then what exactly are you claiming?
You should look into mathematical definitions of probability. You will be surprised to find not all formal mathematical systems can fit inside probability spaces.
Formal mathematical systems are not physical objects. The brain – which is presumably the source of natural intelligence – is.
By "everything" I was referring (obviously) to things in the universe. Mathematical systems are not things in the universe. They are not made of universe the way every object, including a brain, is.
And no, it's not vacuous at all. GP is trying to argue that a probabilistic input → output machine doesn't produce intelligence. But we have an existence proof of exactly that!
Equating "classical" with "deterministic" is however pushing it a bit too far, when no one and nothing can ever do even a very small fraction of said determination...
Quantum is not bullshit and yes, classical is deterministic.
That's why the brain cannot possibly be anything other than an input → output machine, which is functionally deterministic (with maybe some fully random components), but is easiest to describe as probabilistic.
In the same way that LLMs are functionally deterministic, but easiest to describe as probabilistic.
Wow you just got us a complete nostalgia moment to the good old times when the computer who always beats us at chess became `not artificial intelligence`...
It was the fact that Hegseth disbanded the team that used to ensure civilian targets are not hit. He was proud about it, see, ensuring civilians are not hit is woke waste of money. Literally.
Then school gets hit and it is "bad data" as if there was no one responsible for checking the data.
Yeah sure it was bad data, it’s great when you can blame a database or AI for crimes against humanity isn’t it? /s
And in a couple of decades this stuff gets declassified and everyone will say „oh no how atrocious“, but those responsible will most likely be dead by then.
The problem always was that the central planners never knew enough to plan the economy right. Well, with enough technology, enough reporting into the central database, they theoretically could know enough.
And that might actually work, if that were the only problem. But it's not. The deeper problem is that people work better when they get to share in the proceeds. People didn't work very well in the "worker's paradise". They worked half-heartedly, doing the least they could to get by, and production (and quality) reflected it. (This isn't exclusive to communism, though. Large corporations can have similar issues.)
It's the promise of a reward that makes people work better. I don't think it necessarily needs to be a share of the proceeds. Athletes push themselves hard for recognition and some monetary reward. A planned economy could have something like that to motivate people.
It's not just large corporations, it's arguably most jobs, and it's getting worse. Wageslaves don't get to keep those proceeds either, not enough bargaining power.
The thing is... although the writing is unmistakably full of LLMisms, I can't fault the `author` for having produced a slop readme.
The content earns its keep, it only grates because of the robotic personality. We need another word than "slop" for this.
That "loosely" hides a bit of a tragedy on the Studio Ghibli adaptation: instead of accepting the transcendent Hayao Miyazaki work that she and we all deserved, she refused what she misunderstood would be a Disney-like cartoon...
And instead of this, much later, the not-at-all ready son, Goro Miyazaki, had a go without having done the massive thought-work that you can for example glimpse Hayao doing on the emotional arc of Ponyo
So does your interpretation then also mean that a planned deprecation of Search has started, with well-timed reliability deprecations, so that users are deliberately being taught to rely only on AI summaries?
A draw-down of staff at Google? Have you been following the layoff news? Yes, Google is pivoting right now. Search isn't going away, but its shape is changing.
reply