scotu

the expectation is that we won't be prompting this models the way we do now down the road. As in: prompting is the command line of LLM, at some point we'll get the equivalent of a GUI (either because we can be clueless on how to prompt because the LLM is so good, or it's so good at eliciting your requirements, or because there is no prompt at all and you interface with the LLM completely differently)

You could foresee that under the covers there is always going to be some prompting but it's going to be performed rarely by few people?

> changing sexuality

The sexuality is not "changing" significantly, what changed is that it's getting less dangerous to 1. realize that you are not straight 2. not be straight 3. tell people (including polls) that you are not straight...

By having homosexuality violently oppressed, ostracized and ridiculed in the past, and slowly reversing that attitude towards it? People were literally criminals for loving people of the same sex...

I suppose I was thinking the original comment referred to the concept of metaverse, not FB's product. Then my question was: do companies have to colonize something that doesn't have scarcity and fake it so that they can profit?

why does there need to be profit where there is no natural scarcity?

google "sucks" because ads. It might have other problems, but when you can buy your competitor name as a keyword ad and on mobile you need to scroll 1+1/2 screens to get to maybe the 1st organic result and the ad is barely different from the organic, you end up with a sucky search engine, no matter the algorithm.

The competitor website is not a slightly suboptimal result for the query: it's literally the wrong result if I'm not adding "alternative" to the search query. I'm sorry.

aside from the fact that as others have pointed out there is more to firefox than the engine (though I wish I could have that too) such as firefox sync and a UI that better suits my taste, it also signals interest in using a different browser which hopefully will push apple to allow full 3rd party web browsers at some point.

one would assume usps would have the best data regarding residential addresses, so I assume "where you live" is not a residential address. Part of the reason they are delivering to residential addresses (and no "to the local post office") is to limit the orders by household, and avoid scalpers reselling those tests.

Obviously ideally they should be limiting the orders by person, but without national id and with scalpers ready to make a penny wherever they can we cannot have nice things.

Current policy discussion doesn't change the result presented in the article, the only thing I've been discussing.

> your punitive tax increases

again, never even talked bout INCREASES, only stopping cuts. Do you know the difference between not cutting and increasing? If you do are you just trying your hand at fearmongering? Nah... you seem the kinda folk who would only argue in good faith.

Buddy, this thread is about the long running art of "vote for me, I'll cut taxes for the rich. What you say? You are not rich? No worries, the rich will make sure those cuts help you out as well" and whoever believes it. It makes no logical sense, but people believe it. The article at the top seems to point to those cuts not trickling down.

It's funny because it's not even about increasing taxes, it's just about the CUTS. You are going to be ok, don't be scared...

we got it, you don't like SF government. You don't have to manage tax money like SF does only because you decide not to do rich tax cuts. Again, it's a false dichotomy.

And the fact that SF government doesn't work doesn't negate that tax cuts for the rich don't trickle down, so why should the 99% support these cuts if they are not going to benefit from them?

I don't want you to vote against your interests, I want all others to vote in favor of theirs (against politicians that sell the tax cuts as "trickle down economics")