ballmerpoint

Even back then, it was partly various three-letter agencies manufacturing their own criminals to justify the budget.

Yes, of course. It doesn’t seem to recall the specific details very well, or confuses them with x86 or ARM instructions that do similar things. And yes, my AGENTS.md says ONLY USE INSTRUCTIONS IN blah.txt.

I dunno, clearly I need an LLM psychiatrist.

IME, they’re still pretty bad at getting specific implementation details of SIMD correct. The best I’ve done so far is to harness them to an actual piece of hardware and have them iterate until they see performance improvements but 1) Goodhart’s law, they tend to overfit the benchmark suite and 2) the resulting SIMD often becomes illegible.

It should, I agree, but in practice the enforcement mechanism no longer functions.

> If some tech bro can't do the research in an afternoon with an agent, it's not worth doing at all, let alone worth paying a PhD for a tenured lifetime job to do.

The OpenAI math dump showed that it’s not worth paying hundreds of PhD-years if a tech bro can do it with an agent.

> If you don't do homework, it is only on you.

The issue with this policy is hyperbolic discounting — students are fine choosing not to do homework when the consequences (EDIT: that is, doing poorly on the exam) are still in the future, but less so when they become present.

Then they lash out at the instructor, even if it’s really their fault.

> You’re right I don’t value the opinions of economists unless they’ve applied their theories in practice.

I’m glad you finally admitted to some of your feelings on the matter. A limited hangout, as they say.

> I don’t think someone who just thinks about stuff should have the power to “take Starlink away” from someone who does stuff.

Even if you insist Krugman “just thinks about stuff,” he objectively does not have the power you ascribe to him.

Yeah, you simply don’t like the guy, and it’s becoming clear that you probably don’t like economists in general.

I gave you the benefit of doubt earlier, but you can’t get through a comment without dropping a snarky jab.

Not liking people is normal. I don’t see why you thought you had to attempt to conceal your contempt (or that you could, since it’s apparently so strong).

Exactly my point. Some other commenters got wrapped around themselves thinking I was using regressive as a synonym for conservative, but no, I said what I meant; specific words mean specific things.

(1952).

Heinlein was such an odd fellow. Extremely progressive on one hand and extremely regressive on the other, sometimes in the span of a single paragraph.

But Krugman doesn’t “just study stuff.” That’s the misrepresentation. You’re not performing skepticism; it’s either ignorance or petty dishonesty.

And all the Krugman negging! “Not a real Nobel Prize.” Sick burn, dude.

You know, I hadn’t noticed that it didn’t.

Must be some vestigial, ancient hacker ethos thing.

Absolutely. It’s not socialism to nationalize a company that’s gone and made itself instrumental to national security and/or foreign policy. Especially when said company seems to interfere with either on a whim, often against (or perhaps I should say, not always entirely aligned with) America’s interests.