lad

If that’s a joke, it’s a good one. Otherwise, well, there are a lot of “this letter isn’t needed let’s throw it away,” in most cases it will not work as good as you think.

Not everything that’s poorly written is ai, you should give humans more credit

We have an engineering manager that’s about the same, the only issue is that they let PR through because features are wanted and there’s no time to get things right.

I think, I may be pleased to have to redo everything several times to make it better and simpler, but what we get is that everything is bad but we’ll still merge 😞

I now feel at several times I fucked up quite a lot by making something that works but not something simpler.

One can be pro- or anti- any concept or thing, some options just make more sense

I don’t think this operator is a real feature, tbh 😅

This is an interesting article, but I think that this standardisation is exactly for port being the same, not for pinning specific implementation of the 600+ pages long standard.

Wow what a marketing scum trick to show all compatible older generations as separate products

Maybe a rat brain project? I think the mapping of human may take longer, but yeah, once it happens interesting times are on the horizon

Also, maybe in a world where you measure anyone with money it makes sense to measure intelligence with money ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

A dog may be able to fully react and learn how to react with the exterior. But can it modify itself the way human brain can?

As per current psychology’s view, yes, even if to a smaller extent. There are problems with how we define conscience, and right now with LLMs most of the arguments are usually related to the Chinese room and philosophical zombie thought experiments, imo

I’d say that difference between nature boiling down to maths and LLMs boiling down to maths is that in LLMs it’s not the knowledge itself that is abstracted, it’s language. This makes it both more believable to us humans, because we’re wired to use language, and less suitable to actually achieve something, because it’s just language all the way down.

Would be nice if it gets us something in the long run, but I wouldn’t keep my hopes up

Not quite related to the topic, but I encountered several ‘books’ that can be replaced by several paragraphs of text, and this is almost as bad as making three hours video instruction where 30 seconds or a bit of text would suffice. I find it horrible that such ones are written at all

How lossy can it be until it’s not infringement? One-line summary of some book is also a lossy reproduction

Yeah, in case of polio and pox, there’s no question of if it will be beneficial

A good link, maybe image may be harmful even if it’s without context

So, you’re suggesting we make games per hour subscription? A good idea /s

Although you may be right about why they did it, I feel like imagery of gambling is not meant to be ‘something that is in any way related to something that happens to be gambling’, it’s when gambling is shown but you’re not the one gambling. If someone in game is gambling that’s imagery, if a game uses cards for something that is not gambling it’s not imagery.

Maybe winning a game award while being solo developer studio, it feels like this to me

* ortalaB

So… solitaire should be 18+ after all?