genuine question https://mathstodon.xyz/@sc_griffith/113680680638530340
this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2024
24 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
1489 readers
74 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The British elected a guy who wears a mop on his head. You cannot convince me that is his actual hair.
I still have occasional intrusive visions of Johnson busting into an unattended supply closet in the Palace of Westminster to steal a fresh mop head, shouting, "BLOODY LABOUR NICKED ME TOUPÉE!"
@istewart @techtakes Spoiler: it's not his natural hairstyle, he's been caught deliberately mussing it up before going on camera. Also, his friends and family call him "Alex" (short for Alexander), not "Boris". It's all an act.
He's really sold the bit, hasn't he?
Yet, if you cover up his hair, he easily scans as "generic English aristocrat."
load more comments
(1 replies)
mild guess: "golden boys, with the the 30+ years required to look Politically Evolved"? and of course the selection factors involved from even just getting to that point and the stylist/image handling that that involves
there's also an element of the system does as designed, and there's an element of self-reinforcing delivery/production of these ghouls
People probably asked the same question about the first Habsburgs.
Oddly parodied before it happened in the tv series community (the dad of the somewhat racist main character. The dad itself is very racist).
E: I do wonder what Javier Milei looks like if he would dye his hair
he would continue to look like shit
load more comments
(2 replies)
~~Brief~~ overlapping thoughts between parenting and AI nonsense, presented without editing.
The second L in LLM remains the inescapable heart of the problem. Even if you accept that the kind of "thinking" (modeling based on input and prediction of expected next input) that AI does is closely analogous to how people think, anyone who has had a kid should be able to understand the massive volume of information they take in.
Compare the information density of English text with the available data on the world you get from sight, hearing, taste, smell, touch, proprioception, and however many other senses you want to include. Then consider that language is inherently an imperfect tool used to communicate our perceptions of reality, and doesn't actually include data on reality itself. The human child is getting a fire hose of unfiltered reality, while the in-training LLM is getting a trickle of what the writers and labellers of their training data perceive and write about. But before we get just feeding a live camera and audio feed, haptic sensors, chemical tests, and whatever else into a machine learning model and seeing if it spits out a person, consider how ambiguous and impractical labelling all that data would be. At the very least I imagine the costs of doing so are actually going to work out to be less efficient than raising an actual human being and training them in the desired tasks.
Human children are also not immune to "hallucinations" in the form of spurious correlations. I would wager every toddler has at least a couple of attempts at cargo cult behavior or inexplicable fears as they try to reason a way to interact with the world based off of very little actual information about it. This feeds into both versions of the above problem, since the difference between reality and lies about reality cannot be meaningfully discerned from text alone and the limited amount of information being processed means any correction is inevitably going to be slower than explaining to a child that finding a "Happy Birthday" sticker doesn't immediately make it their (or anyone else's) birthday.
Human children are able to get human parents to put up with their nonsense ny taking advantage of being unbearably sweet and adorable. Maybe the abundance of horny chatbots and softcore porn generators is a warped fun house mirror version of the same concept. I will allow you to fill in the joke about Silicon Valley libertarians yourself.
IDK. Felt thoughtful, might try to organize it on morewrite later.
Rationalist debatelord org Rootclaim, who in early 2024 lost a $100K bet by failing to defend covid lab leak theory against a random ACX commenter, will now debate millionaire covid vaccine truther Steve Kirsch on whether covid vaccines killed more people than they saved, the loser gives up $1M.
One would assume this to be a slam dunk, but then again one would assume the people who founded an entire organization about establishing ground truths via rationalist debate would actually be good at rationally debating.
load more comments
(4 replies)
In other news, Character.AI has ended up in the news again for allowing school shooter chatbots to flourish on its platform.
You want my off-the-cuff take, this is definitely gonna fuck c.ai's image even further, and could potentially leave them wide open to a lawsuit.
On a wider front, this is likely gonna give AI another black eye, and push us one step further to the utter destruction of AI as a concept I predicted a couple months ago.
In the department of not smelling at all like desperation:
On Wednesday, OpenAI launched a 1-800-CHATGPT (1-800-242-8478) telephone number that anyone in the US can call to talk to ChatGPT via voice chat for up to 15 minutes for free.
It had a very focused area of expertise, but for sincerity, you couldn't beat 1-900-MIX-A-LOT.
FWIW I just got an email from GitHub announcing that Copilot is now free for my account (a very basic one).
Seems like everybody got that email, my account is semi-abandoned and still got it. I love the reek of desperation in the morning
yep I think so too. as I think I posted here a while back:
25068 + Oct 12 GitHub ( 20K) Your free GitHub Copilot access is ending soon
and now suddenly it's Launched Again! but with limits. gotta whet those appetites just a bit more! sales will totes follow soon!
mine showed up in spam 🤣
if you think about it the human mind is really just a kind of naturally arising artificial intelligence #Deep
I mean, considering only the relationships between words and symbols in the complete absence of context and real-world referents is a good description of how a certain brand of tech dunce thinks.
The object vs meta level.
Nvidia doing their part to help consumers associate AI with unwanted useless bloatware that’s foisted upon them.
Musk got banned in Path of Exile 2 for cheating. I'm not sure what angle to take here, but you gotta admit that it's a bit funny/satisfying. (how does such a busy [assume I'm making air quotes with my fingers] guy have time to play video games? why is he so obsessed with status that he'd try to cheat his way up the leaderboards, and not for the first time either?)
Unfortunately it doesn't look like he was properly banned, just booted out of his session for having suspiciously-high APM. Now, the true eSports nerds among us will already know that high APM is a staple of high-level play in some games but is also an easy way to check for certain types of cheaters. Because of the association with skill in e.g. StarCraft it also became a very easily gamable metric if for some reason you wanted to feel like you knew what you were doing or show off for your friends and strangers online. For example, certain key bindings let you perform some actions as fast as your keyboard's refresh rate allows by holding down a key or abusing the scroll wheel on your mouse. This can send your measured APM through the roof for a time. My gut says this is what Elon was doing that triggered the anticheat program, rather than any amount of actively gaming or actually cheating.
Please note that the hard-won knowledge of my misspent youth has no bearing on how pathetic it is for the richest man in the world to be doing the same kind of begging for clout that I did at 14, especially since I'm pretty 14-year-old me was frankly better at it.
The starcraft apm thing always amused me, people who instead of giving an order once, just keep clicking that mouse and issuing the same move order over and over again because apms. Good way to teach Goodhart's law to Gamer Brains.
is that why tournament StarCraft fucking looks like that? it’s anxiety-inducing and my brain hates it. maybe the intense focus on APM and rote strategy is why I ended up liking turn-based strategy games a lot more
A lot of the spamming at the SC2 tournament level is about staying warmed up so that when you get into a micro-intensive battle later on where all of those actions might count (splitting your marines to protect from AoE while target-firing the suicide bombing banelings, for example) you can do it. Doesn't make it look less ridiculous, especially in the first couple of minutes before the commentary has anything to really talk about so they try to act like stealing 5 minerals at that stage could somehow decide the game. But there is a slightly more reasonable logic to it than just speed running an RSI to look cool.
The original StarCraft also offers a lot of opportunities to use your "extra" APM to optimize around the godawful AI pathing and other "quirks" of the engine. It's not as bad as, say, DotA in terms of "this was a limitation of the original engine that is now a major cornerstone of playing the game well and if you complain about it you're just bad" but it's definitely up there. As the game goes on you'll usually see players start getting slightly more fast and loose with, say, optimizing the mining at their new base because at that point in the game splitting your focus that much is more detrimental even if you can move that fast.
I definitely ended up in the occasional spectator and campaign player for all that, though. Especially now that I'm starting to have creaky old man wrists of my own.
He wants to be seen as the Uber-nerd, better at nerding than everybody else, so of course he would cheat. See also how he has claimed he was the best at quake. He just is hype and bravado because a group of people who saw him stutter (*) about some half remembered/understood science fiction ideas were impressed with his genius and drive up his stocks/reputation. He now is going after the anti-woke nerds as potential marks (He has said quite a few dumb thinks about video games recently).
See also how his elden ring build was bad, his diablo 4 world record relied on abusing an exploit, he thinks polytopia is some sort of complex high level game on the level of chess. The man is a dullard. (E: He also is bad at dnd., a cooperative game which you basically cannot fail to play well))
*: Nothing wrong with having a stutter, that happens. It is weird people claim his stutter is not because he just stutters, but because it is a sign his brain is so great that he is having a hard time because it is thinking about so many genius level things at the same time.
See also how he has claimed he was the best at quake.
oh hell no
See also how his elden ring build was bad, his diablo 4 world record relied on abusing an exploit, he thinks polytopia is some sort of complex high level game on the level of chess. The man is a dullard.
so many right-wing grifters want to be associated with gaming because gamers are really easy to trick. in this case it’s particularly obvious: musk doesn’t give a fuck about the games he claims to be an expert in, but souls games are particularly nerdy and quake’s in that right nostalgia spot that most of musk’s marks know what it is but don’t know how high-level play looks
because he refuses to play competitively or follow any of the rules around organized speedrunning, musk’s doing the modern, depressing equivalent of claiming to be the strongest guy around (no you can’t see him lift any weights in a competition setting, only the suspiciously light ones in his home gym) and therefore obviously the best leader. all the associated messaging — how you need to be a genius to play at this (actually relatively low) level, how speedrunning (extremely poorly) helps you see the matrix, how game X (it’s gonna be fucking starcraft next I swear) makes you an expert in resource management — is crafted to make the susceptible associate these lazy non-wins with political leadership.
also, lol @ musk, best buddies with Tim Sweeney, forgetting that unreal tournament exists. maybe that makes two of them — Sweeney really doesn’t give a fuck about UT anymore either
I'm employing the working hypothesis that gamers are particularly easy to trick with rage-bait because of short-circuited dopamine loops. One must compulsively game, but if the game sucks, then there must be an explanation that's as simple as the game. I've got a couple of buddies who are always whining about the new Call of Duty, but always pick it up every year anyway. This correlates with all the anti-woke misogyny freakouts, too... their gaming is on a spectrum with their porn consumption, and a lot of these weirdos are probably alt-tabbing back and forth as urges arise.
I was rather shocked that Epic took down UT2003/2004 from the storefronts where it still existed, on top of already failing to deliver the new-generation Unreal Tournament. Seems like a wholly thoughtless way to bury their history, but maybe there were some expiring licensing rights tied up in that? I seriously have to doubt that, though.
because he refuses to play competitively or follow any of the rules around organized speedrunning, musk’s doing the modern, depressing equivalent of claiming to be the strongest guy around (no you can’t see him lift any weights in a competition setting, only the suspiciously light ones in his home gym)
See also how he claimed Zuck was avoiding him and didn't want to fight him because he would lose. (yeah, going to Zucks home when he is not home and offered to fight you in a real ring which you keep ignoring makes you the winner really).
Or see his twitter stats. Before the muskening of twitter, twitter kept various public (because publicly traded) stats which people could see, monthly increase in something like monthly active users which can be targeted by advertising, stuff like that. (the growth rate of which was apparently about 1-2% per month, which is quite impressive imho), but now he talks about 'unregretted user minutes (up by 10% this year(*)), and stuff like that'. He never mentions that (according to the stats I looked into shortly before the takeover) twitter always grew in users, he makes it looks like he did something special. Like a guy buying a restaurant transformed it into a mcdonalds and then goes 'look we sold a lot more hamburgers than last year'.
*: I mention this because I assume that people can do a bit of math in their head and can compare 1-2% monthly growth with 10% yearly, even if it isn't the same stats.
load more comments
(4 replies)
OT: how would you guys recommend learning to program?
well, first you'll need a solid grounding in the theory of categories
that was a joke about abstract mathematics. anyway I'm not much of a programmer but I have found I've learned a lot from working on godot stuff, so I second that recommendation
The only thing I’m worried about is the math, I’m flying blind there.
I think you would need to deliberately choose a mathematical problem to solve, otherwise the most difficult thing you'll come across will be binary representations of numbers and why floats are FUCKING BULLSHIT (seriously though they can be tricky if you think they are just "numbers in a calculator").
If you want to really understand programming language theory, or computer science more generally, you will definitely need mathematics. But if the goal is "I want to tell this chip what to do," you don't need to learn a lot of math, in my opinion.
Edit: also, if you need help with any math, feel free to DM me. I am a former math teacher and sometimes teach algorithms (basically screaming "what is your induction variable") at the undergraduate level.
I appreciate that, thanks!
most people who are considered skilled programmers seem to know very little math (by my arbitrary standards), so I wouldn't worry about it. if you get that the remainder of 8 divided by 5 is 3 then you're 99% of the way there
There are three kinds of programmers. From smallest to largest: Those smart enough to write good math-intensive libraries, those dumb about to think they can, and those smart enough to just use what the first kind made.
I extremely recommend The Little Schemer as a gentle introduction to both programming interactively and to some of the fundamentals of computer science. some of the other books in the series are also good, gentle introductions to some more advanced CS topics too, but they all assume you’ve read through some of this one.
Andrew Plotkin’s Lists and Lists is also pretty good as a self-contained learning environment with a tutorial
other than that, I second the Python recommendation. another first language recommendation I can make is GDScript, the Godot scripting language. it has a very good in-browser interactive tutorial for programming fundamentals, and a very detailed manual once your learning goes beyond what the interactive tutorial teaches. game programming isn’t the easiest way to start in general, but Godot has a few advantages in this area: you can see an interesting result right away when writing code, its scripting language is very well-integrated with its tooling, and it’s fairly close to a couple of other languages in syntax and semantics (specifically Python) so your knowledge should transfer fairly well.
I did have this wacky idea for a roguelike…
hell yeah! roguelikes are so much fun to work on! that could be a very good way to learn GDScript. generally I recommend learning your first couple languages to completion — but where you decide what complete is, including “I’m tired of this language/project” (not at all an uncommon case, and a good sign your brain’s ready for something new). once you’re at that point, you’ll likely be ready for a new language — and languages generally get much easier to learn once you’ve got a couple under your belt.
(also, I might take on a roguelike project in Godot myself… there’s a new library I want to try which implements my favorite way to do game logic for roguelikes)
(also, I might take on a roguelike project in Godot myself… there’s a new library I want to try which implements my favorite way to do game logic for roguelikes)
this looks really cool 👀
I’m excited to try it! I’ve had so many game ideas lately that’d be a lot more convenient to do with godot’s tooling, but would really benefit from something like Bevy’s ECS. this one looks broadly inspired by a similar API to Bevy so it could be the best of both worlds. I’m very curious how it performs — it’s almost certainly gonna be slower than Bevy, but there’s a lot of types of games where logic isn’t a bottleneck.
depends on audience / person? and also maybe teacher
I've stepped people through essentials with e.g. idea "tell me how to make coffee" (as an intro to procedurals and dependency) all the way through many other types/shapes, through lego/blockly/whatever style teaching, and through outright "imagine this is a magic box and ${thing} comes out the other side" stepped iteration. sometimes you can jump straight to "hey so here's a language that means specific things and here's what that means" and go from there
so yeah I guess for my part I'd say I attune to the recipient. but for advice toward teacher I guess I'd attune that toward what I figure they'd be good at teaching
so... what're you good at (teaching)?
I mean for myself. I’ve gotten as far as making a blackjack game in the past, but I couldn’t figure out what to do next.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I got bounced back to Casey Newton's recent master class in critihype and found something new that stuck in my craw.
Occasionally, they get an entire sector wrong — see the excess of enthusiasm for cleantech in the 2000s, or the crypto blow-up of the past few years.
In aggregate, though, and on average, they’re usually right.
First off, please note that this describes two of the most recent tech bubbles and doesn't provide any recent counterexamples of a seemingly-ridicilous new gimmick that actually stuck around past the initial bubble. Effectively this says: yes, they're 0 for 2 in the last 20 years, but this time they can't all be wrong!
But more than that I think there's an underlying error in acting like "the tech sector" is a healthy and competitive market in the first place. They may not directly coordinate or operate in absolute lockstep, but the main drivers of crypto, generative AI, metaverse, SaaS, and so much of the current enshittifying and dead-ending tech industry comes back to a relatively small circle of people who all live in the same moneyed Silicon Valley cultural and informational bubble. We can even identify the ideological underpinnings of these decisions in the TESCREAL bundle, effective altruism and accelerationism, and "dark enlightenment" tech-fascism. This is not a ruthlessly competitive market that ferrets out weakness. It's more like a shared cult of personality that selects for whatever makes the guys in top feel good about themselves. The question isn't "how can all these different groups be wrong without someone undercutting them", it's "how can these few dozen guys who share an ideology and information bubble keep making the exact same mistakes as one another" and the answer should be to question why anyone expects anything else!
In the model card for o1, OpenAI notes: “When o1 was led to believe that it would be shut down when acting on its goal and that its actions were monitored, it attempted to deactivate this ‘oversight mechanism’ in 5% of the time. … When o1 found memos by its ‘developers’ that describe how it is misaligned and will be superseded by a new model, it attempted to exfiltrate its ‘weights’ and overwrite the new model in 2% of cases.”
And yet reading that should give us at least some pause
The lack of critical thinking on display here is stunning.