Then there's another possibility which is that it actually already has worked but just the productivity boost isn't as big as would be obvious if people got 10% more productive. That would still be pretty impressive because it's hard to get a 10% across the board uplift.
a cybernetic machine can nail the task and completely miss the job. coding makes this very very easy to see because the tasks are so legible (and verifiable!): write the function, migrate the API, fix the tests.
we see that the across the board the single PIO like pre-trained PIO7 model matches or outperforms the fine-tuned specialists that were developed with reinforcement learning post-training for those downstream tasks.
Well, I mean, okay, even the whole basis of building Helix is contrarian. Like, I think that if you raise a series A and then you tell your investors that you're going to vibe code a purchasing system, I think that any reasonable board is going to like ask you what you're thinking.
know your goal or suffer a death by a thousand compromises. Because what I had done my whole career and most of us do is compromise to get that next engineer, CTO, investor. You put a jerk on your board because you impressed with their firm name and the valuation and all your friends are going to be impressed and it's going to be so much easier. We make all these compromises and contort ourselves and eventually we wake up and it's company we don't want to work at.
Federal Reserve Board members have often resigned their positions well before their 14-year terms expired, since that's quite a long time to spend in one position in government.
The Player of Games by Ian M. Banks is about a champion board-game player who gets roped into an espionage operation infiltrating an alien culture where political power is determined by the outcome of a uniquely complex strategy game. Set in a far-future human civilization run by a constellation of (mostly) benevolent and inscrutable AIs, Banks's science fiction is more relevant than ever.
Bought after much cutting-board deliberation and based on your recommendations. We love this thing. We got one that nearly fills a section of our counter (between the stove and wall) and it's heaven to have so much space to cut various things at the same time.
Sometimes you have to move fast at the sacrifice of knowledge, and I'm totally on board for that, but I worry that what we'll create is an entire generation of incompetent programmers who can do some amount of things well, but anything that is unique, bespoke, or requires some extra like little elbow grease, might become very difficult. It might cause a whole chasm where juniors remain juniors forever.
In this case, and I think one of the things with our structure that we maybe should have thought about more than we did is that the board of a nonprofit has, unless you put other rules in place, quite a lot of power. They don’t really answer to anyone but themselves. And there’s ways in which that’s good, but what we’d really like is for the board of OpenAI to answer to the world as a whole, as much as that’s a practical thing.
I would argue having a business leader run these institutions and then having a board that has, itself, diverse viewpoints, and by the way, permanently structured to have diverse viewpoints is a much better way to run a university than picking an academic that the faculty supports.
It's really a self-perpetuating board that effectively elects its own members. Once the balance tips, politically, one way or another, it can be kept that way forever. There's no kind of rebalancing system.
When a company fails, most people blame the CEO. I generally blame the board. Because the board's job is to make sure the right person's running the company, and if they're failing, help the person.
That large owner on the board can help buy the time necessary for management to behave in a longer term way. And that's, I think, good for all the shareholders.
I suspect, considering the process retrospect, a great deal of that pain can be avoided by committing to migrating directly to an SQL system the moment you need an index.
I mean, any screen that you have can be a hologram, any media, in any book, art. It can basically be just as effective as a hologram, as a physical object. Any game that you're playing, a board game or any kind of physical game, cards, ping pong, things like that, they're often a lot better as holograms.
For communication, I use Slack for work and community text chat, Talky for video calls, DropBox Paper for writing, Trello for task management, and regular old texts and phone calls for chatting with family.
For communication, I use Slack for work and community text chat, Talky for video calls, DropBox Paper for writing, Trello for task management, and regular old texts and phone calls for chatting with family.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.