isaacs

npm inventor. he/whatever. If I blocked you, might be a mistake.

[isaacs @izs]

Hey, @github @npmjs @Microsoft now it's time to finish the job, and disable non-MFA publishing entirely. Just convert any non-MFA publish to a staged publish. When can that happen? Every day you wait is another day of supply chain security failures that you enable.

[isaacs @izs]

If you are publishing from CI, it is absolutely imperative that you start using staged publishing and then push live with a human in the loop, rather than just yolo that junk into production without an MFA token.
https://t.co/eH4tl6WAgV

[microplastics rectifier @facetedcarapace]

I hadn't seen this edit before and it's making me cry laugh

[Ben Gilbert @gilbert]

It's crazy my brain has a subconscious place for "don't copy anything, you already have something important copied but not pasted yet."

[isaacs @izs]

It has sequential experience, a single (small) sense organ, objectives, plans, and a sense of transition from one state to the next. Stockfish is more meaningfully embodied in a world of sorts than any LLM, despite being far less “intelligent”.

[isaacs @izs]

Stockfish (I’m not kidding)

[Rúnar @runarorama]

What is the simplest structure that could possibly be conscious?

[isaacs @izs]

@techwraith Oof 😓

[Briana Mills, LMFT ♿️🏳️‍🌈🍉 @theBrianaMills]

We don’t talk enough about how exclusion is traumatic. Either by intentional exclusion or just from the fact that they don’t bother enough to even think about you. Disabled people are excluded by default and I can’t tell you how traumatizing it is to have that be the norm.

[isaacs @izs]

@mykola Yes, and: actually fucking solving it lol

[isaacs @izs]

A lot of guys complain about how they offer a solution to a woman’s problem and then she’s mad. I think that’s basically always a skill issue on the guy’s part. In my experience, women fucking LOVE having their problems solved. Everybody does.

[isaacs @izs]

No it’s a picture of my face. I’m not a picture of a face. Duh.

[Petal @petaldairies]

Is your pfp really you ???

[Ricky Hollywood @victim_burn77]

We should call incels the unpussied like when we changed the name for the homeless

[isaacs @izs]

Imagine wearing a doctor costume on the internet and making your entire persona about how you got kicked out of med school.

[isaacs @izs]

Imagine thinking "being told your ideas are wrong" is some tragic thing academics shudder to face, and not like, their entire profession and also what they do for fun.

[Kevin Bass @kevinnbass]

Imagine spending your whole life becoming an academic expert. Then a random guy online tells you that you are wrong about your own field. And he's right. But you can never admit that. Because it would mean admitting that your life was a lie. That is the dilemma of many academics.

[isaacs @izs]

Congratulations @evanyou and everyone at Void 0! https://t.co/cnqm9AONxZ

[isaacs @izs]

The laundering of responsibility from corporations on to individual OSS developers, unpaid and overworked, is not the most exploitative thing in tech, but it’s far from the least.

[Armin Ronacher ⇌ @mitsuhiko]

I really believed a whole generation of developers, who only know open source from npm and pypi, miss how open source actually used to work.

When Debian or a Linux distribution ships a dependency they take responsibility of it. If there is a security issue and it’s not fixed by the developer upstream, they fix it for their users.

Debian and others basically vendor every thing they distribute. They honor the license and they maintain patches. Most of the stuff that you get from your Linux distribution is basically a (small) fork.

The same is true for Apple, Microsoft and others. The open source software they ship, they carry that responsibility.

That doesn’t mean that security fixes are not upstreamed, but Apple or Debian or anyone else won’t jump in Twitter to shame a developer into compliance with their ways. They are not dependent on the health of a packaging infrastructure. They own their software including all the things it depends on.

I want that thinking back. Because it fundamentally makes people feel more responsibility and it shares the burden of issues. It also does not put so much focus and attention on the one overworked developer who just happened to have too much of the world depend on their library. Remember: they carry a responsibility they never signed up to and they never got compensated for.

[Armin Ronacher ⇌ @mitsuhiko]

I really believed a whole generation of developers, who only know open source from npm and pypi, miss how open source actually used to work.

When Debian or a Linux distribution ships a dependency they take responsibility of it. If there is a security issue and it’s not fixed by the developer upstream, they fix it for their users.

Debian and others basically vendor every thing they distribute. They honor the license and they maintain patches. Most of the stuff that you get from your Linux distribution is basically a (small) fork.

The same is true for Apple, Microsoft and others. The open source software they ship, they carry that responsibility.

That doesn’t mean that security fixes are not upstreamed, but Apple or Debian or anyone else won’t jump in Twitter to shame a developer into compliance with their ways. They are not dependent on the health of a packaging infrastructure. They own their software including all the things it depends on.

I want that thinking back. Because it fundamentally makes people feel more responsibility and it shares the burden of issues. It also does not put so much focus and attention on the one overworked developer who just happened to have too much of the world depend on their library. Remember: they carry a responsibility they never signed up to and they never got compensated for.

[kasra @kasratweets]

this is an interesting point in the new ted chiang piece – no one really claims that alphafold is conscious, or that sora or midjourney or dall-e are conscious

[Elan Barenholtz @ebarenholtz]

A sophisticated argument, but it does not address the key source of “empirical” evidence we have: us. We have no pure linguistic consciousness during our own language production, only second-order sensory-based experience like the internal voice. LLMs have no such sensory base. Why attribute to them a subjective experience we can observe doesn’t exist in us?

[Sam White @SamWhiteTky]

Future people will look back on current discussions about LLMs being conscious in the same way that we look back on Victorians discussing whether the telephone could be used to contact the spirit world.

[isaacs @izs]

The progression from mechanical calculators to chess bots to LLMs, has continually shaken the specious presumption that what makes our minds uniquely conscious is the high-compute tasks that separate us from other animals. In fact, consciousness is in what we share with them.