Spivak

This is such a weird take because the US is a high-trust society precisely because of effective policing and the justice system. You're right that it's not the moment to moment gun to your head as for why it works because you won't always have a cop looking at you, but it's not because men are angels—it's because the long arm of the law which deters bad actors even without the gun because they'll get caught eventually.

From my reading we're in agreement basically. The only real difference is that I think AGI is destined to ultimately describe ship's computer but not Data based on current trajectory—largely because trillions of dollars really want to slap that term on a product.

And I don't really think it's entirely unreasonable because there does actually seem to be a real gap in terminology. Even Star Trek didn't really imagine a computer system that's general but exists without consciousness, the whole message of the Exocomp story is exactly that—it's a huge breakthrough that they invented a general system and it turns out to be conscious. And the show makes a point that while the computers they have are incredibly advanced it's ultimately the product of human programming. We seem to just have assumed that any general system would be conscious and the term AGI was born of that assumption.

There's no should, only what economics incentivize. Right now we're not paying for the upfront training costs-it's great, the Millennial subsidy continues. But if, and big if right now, the infinite money font dries up and they have to recoup training investment direct from customers then that looks to be a huge price increase on the ground which makes cheap to train and good enough even more attractive than it already is.

I mean I'm happy for better but it might start grounding the industry where 1.6% better on some benchmarks doesn't justify hundred million investments.

Well they're for sure going to result in something a desperate marketing team is going to call AGI and through persistence through all the laughter will result in a new term being coined like ActualAGI so people can refer to it as separate from "AGI Class Models."

I'm somewhat inclined to give it to them at this point, I mean it's artificial, general in the sense that it can complete tasks it wasn't programmed for, and intelligent enough I guess. I mean if there was a planet with creatures at the level of LLMs we'd probably call it intelligent life—used in that way we're not really implying the creatures are particularly smart. It's as much simulated disembodied intelligence as you could reasonably hope for. I wouldn't at all expect that simulated intelligence: the computer algorithm would have any relation to actual intelligence except at the minimum superficial level needed to complete tasks. With AGI out of the way we would at least have to be more specific on what the sci-fi dream actually entails. The computer from Star Trek is certainly intelligent but you would never say it has a brain or anything close to it.

> normal people can avoid needing to care about the distinction by endeavoring to not kill anyone to begin with

It's the same thing here, a normal person will never run afoul of this law. It is entirely industry professionals who will be affected and they have legal departments who will figure out where the line is to the millimeter. Sure translating to legalese is hard and I expect this kind of legislation will be mostly common law after a bunch of lawsuits but the giveaway that it will be fine is that assigning "bot/not bot" to a given situation is something we all agree on in the industry. There isn't really that much borderline here. You can't accidentally build a web scraper operating off a residential proxy network and it's pretty obvious when you decide to disguise your traffic because you don't have the consent of site you're scraping.

Even the horribly contrived borderline examples boil down to "but I should have the right to actively deceive and circumvent security measures designed specifically to keep me out" which is a pretty tough sell.

Well yes but once you're in the US someone owns the machine you're getting hit by and you can make them take it down. People won't just throw their hands up "well the operator isn't in the US nothing can be done", they'll just make DigitalOcean block them.

Because you can make it not without much difficulty. There's plenty of sites that operate entirely within the US and it's trivial to hard block everyone else. It's not perfect but assuming the law actually works (which isn't a given) inside US borders we now get the advantages of a high-trust system.

At absolute minimum it should mean that US ranges could see fewer captchas because bad actors can be whacked by the legal system instead of degrading user experience.

Sure but this probably wouldn't happen like that, what would happen is that when journalists make that petition it creates a real special case in the law available to everyone.

It's a human level distinction that doesn't have technical distinction—the law handles these kinds of things just fine. The flesh doesn't know the difference between manslaughter and murder but we humans can figure it out well enough.

The world you envision where we decide that the law can't assess intent is certainly an interesting one but I don't think it would be the most functional.

I'm not going to even try and say the venv stuff isn't clunkier and less flexible than what came after but people seem to have a hate bonner for it but not node_modules which is the same concept with better tooling. Python might even get its own direct equivalent so things "just work." And folks love Bundler in Ruby which behaves in even stranger ways than venvs.

Nobody is going to tell you that Python 2->3 wasn't excruciatingly painful but it's hard to argue with the result. Sometimes you have to rip the bandaid off. Python 3 is by far the better language.

You're right the "commercial" timeline of Python would have supported Python 2 forever because big paying clients demand it but I think that would have led to a worse outcome for the OSS community.

In 20 years we'll have finally reached the logical conclusion to all of this that there shouldn't be separate os components you link against and your "OS" will just be manager of lightweight VMs.

Now you can just ship the user your machine and software can theoretically be immortal.

I really want to believe you and that I've just missed the magic support forums but trying to find answers to problems on Windows is just a million forums of the same essentially "turn it off and on again" advice

Linux forums might be obtuse but at least they'll have actual technical details about the problem. Almost without fail any "fix" they propose won't work on your system because it's for a different distro that was EoL 5 years ago but they'll at least give you something to work with.

This. 1 Million billion times this. Your story exactly mirrors mine and good heavens I would never loose weight via the suffering route ever again. Losing weight normally I'm in constant pain and literally can't think of anything else-it's all consuming. I do not say this as exaggeration I would rather go through chemo again. At least that you can make the suffering go away sometimes with meds.