@Zegroe911 workers deciding how to use the surplus value they create, e.g. offering healthcare to all, is very much compatible with Marxism. good rage bait though!
With food, many companies go for the “bliss point,” or the flavor profile that makes the consumer most want to keep eating. It is not the same as the point at which it tastes best.
Similarly there’s a point at which our hours make us least able to revolt, not the most productive
I love how study after study shows that students perform better with less homework, while workers are more productive with more vacation time and shorter shifts, yet we continue doing the opposite because of outdated, guilt-driven beliefs that equate hard work with suffering
as soon as AI is good enough to write blog posts in my voice as good as I would have written them, i intend to use AI to do so. I know what I want to say, and I could say so much more if I didn't need to manual labor the words out one by one
@BigMeanInternet people fervently behaving in a way that’s clearly out of touch with reality seemed so limited to “evangelicals and new age hippies” when I was a kid in the 1990s and now it’s just like…most people most of the time
@francoisfleuret “give a model enough parameters and the model could be conscious” = “give a tree enough leaves and the tree could be conscious”
the architecture matters. this is obvious to many people. it is you who is being vacuous.
@hecubian_devil I don’t get what you’re saying. yes — the phrase “fancy autocomplete” looks silly because fancy autocomplete is more versatile and capable than one expects, but that’s still what LLMs are, objectively: massively layered, hierarchical autocomplete. like what is the assertion here
@biggestjoel someone tried to pull “this is like someone in 1895 telling us to stop saying cars ‘run’, haha so stupid!”
no; saying an LLM “feels” is a wildly different type of statement. it is not a synonym for “operates.” it entails that we should act a certain way toward them. it’s wrong
@tab_delete not who they are. their past actions.
if “slowing down for the good of the people” were their priority, they would’ve done it earlier.
they’re saying it bc their IPOs and margins are being threatened by open models.
you should know better than most: follow the money.