jordanpg

Yes, a trained LLM out of the box, but it's not like it's an insoluble technical problem. Any number of post-training components or other ML models can be bolted on, fine-tuning, etc.

There. Are. Four. Lights!!!

We should remember Picard's defiance, especially now.

To me, an unspoken truth about politics is that it is extremely boring. Not governing, that is interesting. Doing politics. It's not clear from the article how involved the Students plan to remain once the government is formed, but I suspect a return to conventional politics lies ahead, for better or for worse.

> In time it may be that LLMs will be so good that we can't tell the difference.

I have to believe that we are within a couple of years if not months of this. This problem is too well-known to not be a major focus of the frontier labs' efforts.

> don't require the personal discipline of caloric deficit

This reminds of a of Reddit thread I saw on r/cholesterol where a similar sentiment was expressed. Several cardiologists weighed in with comments to the effect that "personal discipline" has been tried for the last 50 years or so and has utterly failed to arrest heart disease and that, yes, GLP-1s are a miracle drug.

The downside of following this kind of advice is that you have to spend a lot of time thinking and strategizing about stuff that is generally pretty boring.

There's a Contracts prof reading this and writing a final exam question right now.

The lawyers I know are very fixated on the problem of hallucinated case citations which is amusing to me as a onetime programmer, since case citations have a well-defined syntax and would be relatively easy to check programmatically.

In the podcast, Cal Newport repeats at least 20 times that agentic AI is nothing more than an LLM execution loop, as if this is some kind of trump card, taking for granted the usual stochastic parrot trope. At no point does he even consider the possibility that the LLM output itself is noteworthy. These people are permanently stuck in November 2022.

Simple? Just wait until a federal court finds OpenAI or Anthropic immune under Section 230 for something an agent does.

Also, even after you find precisely what you're looking for, there is no guarantee that what arrives will not be a cheap imitation or reduced-quality version of what you purchased.

Before reading The Stranger, I was headlong into the then-popular "New Atheism" movement, which came with a certain air of superiority of brainpower over the naive masses. But reading The Stranger had a profound impact on me, even before I knew anything more formal about existentialist philosophy.

It was an awakening: I began to understand that the problem with the world isn't that everyone needs to learn more physics and think more like me. The problem is that none of this stuff -- life -- really means anything; that's a hard pill for lots of people to swallow (understandably); and our stupid little lives are just 80 years or so of farting around and trying to forget about what is obvious (h/t to KV).

The book ultimately softened my overly critical views about religion and superstition and helped me mature into someone much more sympathetic to the various weird things that people think and do.

Can confirm. Top of the article could be about my dad. Same flavor of cancer and everything.

I suspect this is happening a thousand times a day right now. But it will be many years before the first test case gets to a federal appeals court. In the meantime, there will be some unknown tens of thousands of new patents granted that involved varying degrees of AI inventorship. The legal term of art is "reliance interest." I think courts will be extremely reluctant to rock the boat by the time this is litigated because AI will be as common as "Googling" by then.