fullsquare

you don't have to choose a side and you can wish everyone involved a very nice visit to hague

either that, or nukes would be used first in korean war instead. imo it's a good thing that nukes were first used against the most cartoonishly evil fascist state imaginable at that point

oh no what will we do, the open source leaded gasoline was released. the genie is out of the bottle, even if you ban it you'll still have people using it locally

You don’t read books for that though. Does this person think books are just sequences of facts you’re supposed to memorise?

I think i have something shaped like counterexample. Large literature reviews and compilations of data tables and such can work like this, and grepping them will get you a feel what is possible and a single practical example per, but even then you're supposed to read them in order to get not only what is possible, but also what is not (or at least what wasn't tested) and what fails and how and why. Actually reading through also gives you a bigger picture and allows for drawing your own conclusions ofc like you notice

Don’t you ever read something and go “oh, I never even thought about this”, “I didn’t know this was a problem”, “I wouldn’t have thought of this myself”. If not then what the fuck are you reading??

even then feeding them to chatbot is valleybrain nonsense because grep will be more than enough and much faster, and you naturally know what's inside only after reading it

even then, just having right snippet is not enough because presumably result would be only apparent after testing irl, or perhaps building a model or simulation or what have you. even then, getting to the point where you need to do any of that requires degree of curiosity and ability to put information from different sources together that would exclude promptfondlers. it's like these people try on purpose to think as little as possible

solzhenitsyn is pretty sus too, with all that him being orthodox fundamentalist, fan of tsar, panslavic antisemite, 2000s putin fan (died three days into russian invasion of georgia), proponent of enlargement of russia to include "sufficiently russified" parts of belarus, ukraine and kazakhstan and therefore opponent of ukranian independence; also

Solzhenitsyn made a speaking tour after Francisco Franco's death, and "told liberals not to push too hard for changes because Spain had more freedoms now than the Soviet Union had ever known."

In 1983 he met Margaret Thatcher and told her "the German army could have liberated the Soviet Union from Communism but Hitler was stupid and did not use this weapon"

Regarding Ukraine he wrote “All the talk of a separate Ukrainian people existing since something like the ninth century and possessing its own non-Russian language is recently invented falsehood” and "we all sprang from precious Kiev".

Solzhenitsyn was a supporter of the Vietnam War and referred to the Paris Peace Accords as 'shortsighted' and a 'hasty capitulation'.

Solzhenitsyn was critical of NATO's eastward expansion towards Russia's borders and described the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia as "cruel" [...] Solzhenitsyn accused NATO of trying to bring Russia under its control; he stated that this was visible because of its "ideological support for the 'colour revolutions' and the paradoxical forcing of North Atlantic interests on Central Asia"

(all from wikipedia entry on him)

it's a little wonder that american altright embraced his writings

chatbots really are leaded gasoline for zoomers

it is some global anomaly that couple of biggest companies are essentially running on ad revenue (especially facebook and google)

wouldn't it make more sense if that title went to company that is, idk, in food or construction or energy or mining business

it's like they purposefully try to think as little as possible

looking forward to day when random datacenter where they outsourced their thinking burns down

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

no

not yet at least, but this might change soon

though he’s correct in saying the ethics of language models aren’t a self-solving issue, even though he expresses it in critihype-laden terms.

the subtext is always that he also says that knows how to solve it and throw money at cfar pleaseeee or basilisk will torture your vending machine business for seven quintillion years

i think you've got it backwards. the very same people (and their money) who were deep into crypto went on to new buzzword, which turns out to be AI now. this includes altman and zucc for starters, but there's more

is the evil funding man going to eat the gimp pepper