nerevarthelame

While not negative, it seems that their total revenue and EPS was still lower than forecast, hence GOOG stock being down 15% today.

"Literally nothing"? The guy who cut Starlink service is the guy who's making the roadster.

In the context of Meta trying to get non-technical people to embrace Muse agents to handle personal affairs, their internal metric showing a ~3% violation rate for mishandling personal information seems unacceptably high.

My casual interpretation is that most kids didn't want to use the AI tutor. The authors estimate that time spent using the AI tutor is as effective as time spent studying without AI assistance, which is around one fourth as effective as studying with a real tutor. The real tutors are obviously quite expensive, comparatively.

So, if some kids do prefer studying with this AI tutor, that's as good as studying without it. Whichever approach gets them to put the study time in.

I've been tracking "emotional vectors" in my software for some time now. My Apache web server gets sad (5xx errors), frustrated (4xx), happy (2xx), thoughtful (1xx). I can even see it express these emotions through some of its messages.

It feels like moving toward a local maxima. In this example the LLM advice outperformed one doctor who dropped the ball in some ways, but I do not look forward to a world where we make it even more difficult to talk to doctors, and route most medical interactions to LLMs. I expect that in 5 years I'll be futilely shouting "representative" into my phone as my appendix ruptures.

With this sort of advice from LLMs, I think there's a lot of selective recall that's easily overlooked -- where we gloss over all the bad, dead-end lines of advice we seek from the LLM oracle.

I've been re-reading "Politics and the English Language" about once a month lately. There are so many parallels between what he saw in his era's bad modern writing and AI-assisted writing:

> As I have tried to show, modern writing at its worst does not consist in picking out words for the sake of their meaning and inventing images in order to make the meaning clearer. It consists in gumming together long strips of words which have already been set in order by someone else, and making the results presentable by sheer humbug. The attraction of this way of writing is that it is easy. It is easier – even quicker, once you have the habit ... If you use ready-made phrases, you not only don’t have to hunt about for the words; you also don’t have to bother with the rhythms of your sentences, since these phrases are generally so arranged as to be more or less euphonious ... By using stale metaphors, similes and idioms, you save much mental effort, at the cost of leaving your meaning vague, not only for your reader but for yourself ... A scrupulous writer, in every sentence that he writes, will ask himself at least four questions, thus: What am I trying to say? What words will express it? What image or idiom will make it clearer? Is this image fresh enough to have an effect? And he will probably ask himself two more: Could I put it more shortly? Have I said anything that is avoidably ugly? But you are not obliged to go to all this trouble. You can shirk it by simply throwing your mind open and letting the ready-made phrases come crowding in. They will construct your sentences for you – even think your thoughts for you, to a certain extent – and at need they will perform the important service of partially concealing your meaning even from yourself.

But his "6 rules" are brilliant too. I'll look into his other essays.

I don't think any part of the comment you're responding to is "a matter of opinion." You're choosing to insert your opinion that you don't think it's moral for a government to help addicts if they are charged for the thing they're addicted to.

You're welcome to that opinion, but don't pretend that "addiction is a public health issue, gambling addicts have high suicide rates, and many profit from others' addictions" are subjective.

It's extremely unrealistic to sue someone for violating your Terms of Service. It's not impossible -- you'd need to sue them for a breach of contract and demonstrate clear financial damages --, but the primary solution is to just refuse to provide them service.

Like, Reddit may know that Bazzly is selling fake comments, which violates Reddit's ToS. How many comments can they prove are tied to Bazzly? How much does an astro-turfed comment financially harm Reddit, and can they convince a jury of that?

Instead, most companies will aggressively shut down the bot networks, if they can identify them, and hope that the astro-turfers focus on other platforms, and/or make it more financially challenging to do it successfully on theirs.

As an adult, I used Google Sheets as a group chat among my friends. We had different employers with different internet restrictions. Before that we used a self-hosted Telnet chat server, until someone's employer blocked that.

It was a lot more fun than Discord, Slack, or any other dedicated chat client. With Sheets, we'd do fun little gags and bits in the spreadsheets. Everything ended up being really personalized and owned by us. Now we just send boring messages on WhatsApp. I miss the old ways.

I'll rent an army of yes agents instead.

While I may have responded to your comment, I'm not debating you. My intention was to let other readers know that the sentiments you're expressing are little more than gutter eugenics hiding behind a flimsy facade of academic language and charts.

CIS is an anti-immigration hate group founded by a eugenicist and white supremacist. They're widely condemned for publishing factually incorrect and methodologically flawed reports by organizations across all of the political spectrum, save the furthest right extremists. That is not a legitimate source of information on immigration or welfare.

Soulless LLM-ese. The content is needlessly stretched to occupy space, paragraphs, and tables. Any actual insights could have been condensed and conveyed with 80% less text.

The "Complete 72-Hour Raw CSV Dataset" CSV contains 13 records. That incomplete data is formatted incorrectly: rows 6 and 11 are missing payload_bytes, so their description shows in the wrong column.

The "How DeGoogled Are You" section is mostly a separate issue from the test described in the article, and it has no place being at the top. The article is about how Android phones are passively phoning home. For example, switching from Chrome to Brave won't reduce idle phone-home, as Android users can't uninstall Chrome, and the idle activity was not related to Chrome. The same goes for most of the other recommendations in that widget.