Natsu

Grammar is very important. You can understand all the words and not know if the super robots power the spaceship or the spaceship powers the super robots. And I remember some translators getting that particular point wrong because the anime's lore made the super robots work in strange ways.

It's copyright law, they're not supposed to have extra copies of the work, just one.

It's funny to think that pre-LLM archives are the new low-background steel.

I did this just now, ironically before I even saw this discussion. I ended up questioning the AI about humanism.

> Claudenglish

I prefer to call it Cloddish, myself.

He had a job he'd worked and mastered his entire life replaced by machinery, leaving a large family with young kids to scramble to pay the "demon mortgage" doing everything they could manage, even as tragedy struck repeatedly: a daughter dead at the breakfast table from the Spanish flu, the eldest son beaten by police after an argument related to unsafe working conditions (he lost a finger to machinery) who died in a hospital later, or the father laid up in traction after falling off a roof who would never be able to work again.

It's not quite the same as the 1800s, but it's not like we're going to relive exactly the same things as then, either. And I do think it'll look like people scrambling, possibly to find entirely different careers.

One place I disagree is that it's going to reduce demand for programmers, I think that will actually increase, as people want more and different things that would currently be impractical. We've already seen what some people can do, cheap tokens will open that up, both for good and ill, not unlike cheap bytes on the internet did.

That hasn't been my family's experience, nor my own. My grandfather's generation had already adapted to the problems of my great grandfather's generation, though they certainly did struggle.

The only constant has always been change. And that just raises the question of why should we preserve ditch digging for our children just so they have meaningless labor to cling to, when we have the option to make new and better things for people. Few of us here are 'labor' in any meaningful sense, to begin with. And while I have spent time working at a factory, and I don't begrudge the robots for taking it away.

The notion that there's some idyllic past to cling to is just wishful thinking to me. The days when one person working with their body alone could have meaningful impact are long gone. We'll have to find a new prosperity that doesn't rely on zero sum thinking from economists who divide by zero, too.

Removing automated looms means everyone has fewer textiles while a few workers benefit. I think most people like the current abundance vs. being forced to spend a large fraction of their household budget on clothing and only having a few outfits in total.

Company mines were because the extraction sites were remote and goods were expensive and so they got exploited as they had essentially no independent supply beyond what their employer would sell, since the employers weren't really interested in living wages and were all too happy to exploit a captive workforce. That sort of condition will become highly relevant again if we ever get space colonies, because air & food will be scarce.

But it absolutely is difficult and disruptive to people's lives when this all changes. I have a family history talking about my great grandpa losing his job to machines and a great uncle losing a finger to bread slicing machines back when sliced bread was new, showing what that meant for our family. Yet I can also see how the past couple of generations adapted to that to find new ways forward. None of them decided to stick with the idea of being a "master tinner" they all found other ways to produce things people actually wanted.

But all we did was ask the AI for world peace. How could that possibly go wrong?

It looks like they're relying on tracked changes and human review, but I didn't see anything addressing something that has frequently made the news: LLMs outright hallucinating cases or holdings.

If the human lawyers don't catch that on review, they're likely to have an angry judge and an AI saying "absolutely, you were right to call me out on that, I shouldn't have hallucinated a non-existent case and made the judge sanction you."

My new test is to ask an LLM questions about the documentation and see if it gets correct answers. I wonder if this will become a common QA step for the docs at some point, it's very useful for finding gaps in the docs or things that are unclear.

Executions are frequently public, the barrier is just that people have to attend in person, so relatively few people do so. Livestreaming is something new.

I don't think the killer was actually prejudiced by this at all, but I think it was done as a way to say this nonsense shouldn't be in court at all.