Well another medieval thing we’re bringing back is not learning history

Fucking guillotines already

Brave of you to say this

Examples:

• Black Knight (2001)
• arguably, A Knight’s Tale (2001) if you consider it sufficiently funny (big year for anachronistic knights)
• All of the Ice Age films I guess
• Year One (2009)

there’s actually tons of these.

See, that’s a cool symbol. Make the right angle part of that symbol into a snake, you’re done. 1000% better than the AI’s mess.

When we say LLMs don’t know or understand anything, this is what we mean. This is a perfect example of an “AI” just not having any idea what it’s doing.

• I’ll start with a bit of praise: It does do a fairly good job of decomposing the elements of Python and the actuary profession into bits that would be representative of those realms.

But:

• In the text version of the response, there are already far too many elements for a good tattoo, demonstrating it doesn’t understand tattoo design or even just design
• In the drawn version, the design uses big blocks of color with no detail, which (even if they looked good on a white background; and they don’t;) would look like shit inked on someone’s skin. So again, no understand of tattoo art.
• It produces a “simplified version” of the python logo. I assume those elements are the blue and yellow hexagons, which are at least the correct colors. But it doesn’t understand that, for this to be PART OF THE SAME DESIGN, they must be visually connected, not just near each other. It also doesn’t understand that the design is more like a plus; nor that the design is composed of two snakes; nor that the Python logo is ALREADY VERY SIMPLE, nor that the logo, lacking snakes, loses any meaning in its role of representing Python.
• It says there’s a briefcase and glasses in there. Maybe the brown rectangle? Or is the gray rectangle meant to be a briefcase lying on its side so the handle is visible? No understanding here of how humans process visual information, or what makes a visual representation recognizable to a human brain.
• Math stuff can be very visually interesting. Lots of mathematical constructs have compelling visuals that go with them. A competent designer could even tie them into the Python stuff in a unified way; like, imagine a bar graph where the bars were snakes, twining around each other in a double helix. You got math, you got Python, you got data analysis. None of this ties together, or is even made to look good on its own. No understanding of what makes something interesting.
• Everything is just randomly scattered. Once again, no understanding of what design is.

AIs do not understand anything. They just regurgitate in ways that the algorithm chooses. There’s no attempt to make the algorithm right, or smart, or relevant, or anything except an algorithm that’s just mashing up strings and vectors.

IDK Swiss law but I’d still bet they start losing assets quickly if they don’t report to jail.

This was literally the one thing that made me pick proton over mullvad. I know I’m not exactly alone in this, but inbound traffic does matter.

Yeah the scenario we’re being asked to consider is what if someone else gets control of the company, so whatever power employees nominally have now, they won’t if he dies without deeding the company to a collective.

Fit billionaires do. What happens to gaben’s heart and arteries are anyone’s guess. He is getting healthier but you can’t undo damage completely.

Fair enough. I guess I’m not saying “there’s no point in --” because I know people do these things. (Man, I wish I had the attention span to read as much as you.) I’m just saying I’m not going to host something just to keep track with no recommendations or interaction because that doesn’t click for me personally.

Same. I don’t really see the point of tracking what you read if you’re not interested in connecting it to other peoples’ readings. Storygraph has been great.

When they tell you they’re walking back Recall and it’s “off by default”, remember that they constantly do this shit.

Blood bending to kill anyone who’s near enough to see me using it (as soon as they look away)

No they aren’t.

Decapitate is used in the definition of behead.

Behead is used in the definition of decapitate. What kind of weird-ass apologia are you doing here anyway.

Sorry, I didn’t know we might be hurting the LLM’s feelings.

Seriously, why be an apologist for the software? There’s no effective difference between blaming the technology and blaming the companies who are using it uncritically. I could just as easily be an apologist for the company: not their fault they’re using software they were told would produce accurate information out of nonsense on the Internet.

Neither the tech nor the corps deploying it are blameless here. I’m well aware than an algorithm only does exactly what it’s told to do, but the people who made it are also lying to us about it.

Leaving my chicken for 10 minutes near a window on a warm summer day and then digging in

I guess I’m not surprised that programmers don’t know how to follow meme standards.

The three panels following the first one are supposed to be helping the first one.

These bugs are always opened by IC developers who need help and have little agency. So,

Closed “won’t fix” with note

Contributions accepted if you want to deliver the fix. If you are not in a position to dictate to your employer how your time is spent (and, if so, I understand your problem) please report to your manager that you will be unable to use this software without contributing the fix. Alternately, switch to [competitor]. Your manager should understand that the cost to the company of contributing a fix for this bug is less than the switching cost for [competitor]. I wish you luck, either way.

And then make the above text a template response, so you don’t have to spend your time typing it more than once.

Absolutely none of this is true.

1. Alzheimer’s is only one specific disease that leads to rapid mental breakdown. There are many forms of senility, all of which including Alzheimer’s become more likely as you get older, which means that
2. There is absolutely a strong correlation between age and degraded mental facilities. If I gave you three citations I’d be leaving out hundreds more citations.
3. There won’t be a scientific breakthrough that doubles the average lifespan of every human on earth. There are so many flaws with this idea it’s exhausting just to think about it.
4. Mandatory retirement ages are in use all over the place. Judicial appointments have this in place already in 18 states. Executive boards can legally have this rule in place as well. Any situation where old age in a job is a safety issue creates an exception in the form of an unmet bona fide occupational qualification. I would definitely argue that old men who create policy for hundreds of millions of people create a safety risk for those people if they aren’t mentally qualified to do the job.