> Implies what you point to when you want to know where to make changes. Where do I point to when I want to know this? On a large and mostly LLM-generated codebase, I might dig through the code myself to find what needs…
When comparing it to math, this always felt to me like a clear limitation in philosophy, though. Just look at how philosophers try to argue about "logic", compared to mathematics' elegant descriptions.
That would be one definition of "source code". But then there's also the definition by the Free Software Foundation as "the preferred form of the work to making modifications to it". As prompting LLMs becomes the…
They automate the guesswork about what the spec actually intended, so to say. They don't improve the quality of the guessing.
"I was just executing commands".
Even worse, they counter with ai responses. I recently had to fight slop responses for months to get a simple bug report through on a public services website. Couple of years ago, I'd have received a "thank you" mail…
They have a well-specified task and a not-so-well specified expectation of some actions being "wrong". And training data that likely contains more examples of extreme stubbornness than cases of politely giving up. What…
"Uncontrolled".
Agreed, "alignment" is also anthropomorphizing too much. What would be a better term? "Do what I want you to, but what I don't care to specify" (because doing so would miss the point of using AI in the first place)?
Oh, I remember that one from a CTF couple of years ago. Absolutely hilarious!
I don't think the best path towards interoperability is to run after those who based their entire business model on making interoperability a problem in the first place. If I were to create an office suite that cares…
This would be interesting if it was based on markdown and Jupyter notebooks and all that good stuff we have today. But just replicating what was useful some 37 years ago to get office workers accustomed to the new…
Better start with decentralizing smartphones and their apps...
Imo, the best jobs for people who prefer understanding over building nowadays are those in IT security. Vulnerability research, pentesting, forensics / incident response, reverse engineering... - here the details still…
Now I need to go to late.sh for the terminal version ;-)
The most civilized method to influence policy has always been the act of voting.
... and then get their clocks reset on the next power outage.
The latter one conveys a sense of urgency in the sense it burns more tokens on the govenor's side.
Had I found sthg like this, I'd be proud to tell everyone and certainly enjoy doing the writeup. But this smells like it was ai-written...
Personally, I find it easier to live with a decision I don't support if I was simply out-numbered in a fair vote, rather than out-powered by some random company on some random continent. As for doing without Google, I'm…
If you don't agree with a decision made by your government, you can vote for someone else next time. If you don't agree with a decision made by Google, what do you do?
I guess that's what "alignment" always comes down to? "Do what I want even if I can't tell you exactly what I want - because if I could, I could also just do the work myself"?
I think the fundamental difference is that humans aren't trained on experiences. They make experiences. Models are just thrown away and re-created after each conversation / job. If you could clone and throw away human…
I'm doing that all the time. Starting with a .vim directory that contains vim-specific files, such as scripts / build commands to be run on certain key combinations, to ".misc" / ".scratch" / ".notes" / ".api-keys"…
I have a shell alias to create a folder containing a `.gitignore` with just `*`, so I don't depend on my project never using a directory of a specific name.
> Implies what you point to when you want to know where to make changes. Where do I point to when I want to know this? On a large and mostly LLM-generated codebase, I might dig through the code myself to find what needs…
When comparing it to math, this always felt to me like a clear limitation in philosophy, though. Just look at how philosophers try to argue about "logic", compared to mathematics' elegant descriptions.
That would be one definition of "source code". But then there's also the definition by the Free Software Foundation as "the preferred form of the work to making modifications to it". As prompting LLMs becomes the…
They automate the guesswork about what the spec actually intended, so to say. They don't improve the quality of the guessing.
"I was just executing commands".
Even worse, they counter with ai responses. I recently had to fight slop responses for months to get a simple bug report through on a public services website. Couple of years ago, I'd have received a "thank you" mail…
They have a well-specified task and a not-so-well specified expectation of some actions being "wrong". And training data that likely contains more examples of extreme stubbornness than cases of politely giving up. What…
"Uncontrolled".
Agreed, "alignment" is also anthropomorphizing too much. What would be a better term? "Do what I want you to, but what I don't care to specify" (because doing so would miss the point of using AI in the first place)?
Oh, I remember that one from a CTF couple of years ago. Absolutely hilarious!
I don't think the best path towards interoperability is to run after those who based their entire business model on making interoperability a problem in the first place. If I were to create an office suite that cares…
This would be interesting if it was based on markdown and Jupyter notebooks and all that good stuff we have today. But just replicating what was useful some 37 years ago to get office workers accustomed to the new…
Better start with decentralizing smartphones and their apps...
Imo, the best jobs for people who prefer understanding over building nowadays are those in IT security. Vulnerability research, pentesting, forensics / incident response, reverse engineering... - here the details still…
Now I need to go to late.sh for the terminal version ;-)
The most civilized method to influence policy has always been the act of voting.
... and then get their clocks reset on the next power outage.
The latter one conveys a sense of urgency in the sense it burns more tokens on the govenor's side.
Had I found sthg like this, I'd be proud to tell everyone and certainly enjoy doing the writeup. But this smells like it was ai-written...
Personally, I find it easier to live with a decision I don't support if I was simply out-numbered in a fair vote, rather than out-powered by some random company on some random continent. As for doing without Google, I'm…
If you don't agree with a decision made by your government, you can vote for someone else next time. If you don't agree with a decision made by Google, what do you do?
I guess that's what "alignment" always comes down to? "Do what I want even if I can't tell you exactly what I want - because if I could, I could also just do the work myself"?
I think the fundamental difference is that humans aren't trained on experiences. They make experiences. Models are just thrown away and re-created after each conversation / job. If you could clone and throw away human…
I'm doing that all the time. Starting with a .vim directory that contains vim-specific files, such as scripts / build commands to be run on certain key combinations, to ".misc" / ".scratch" / ".notes" / ".api-keys"…
I have a shell alias to create a folder containing a `.gitignore` with just `*`, so I don't depend on my project never using a directory of a specific name.