Options are leverage embedded in a contract. They enable an amount of capital to control a much larger economic exposure. This magnifies both good and bad outcomes. That each individual bet has a limited loss doesn’t prevent the risk of ruin.
Our adversaries have the training techniques, the data, and the will to attack. And they won’t be slowed down with “embedded evaluators.” They’ll likely have embedded accelerators!
The case for *total* Linux victory (desktop, mobile, server, iot, robots, embedded…): 1) Most agent-programmable People will want fully personalized computing experiences.
It looks to me like OpenAI’s sandbox for this agent suffered from the (quite naïve) assumption that GET requests cannot be used to update data. That’s certainly how the web is supposed to work, but clearly there are applications that don’t hold to that contract.
Met a German founder this week and asked him if all the stories one reads about the challenges of startups in Germany are exaggerated. "No, they're understated." Proceeded to describe spending a full day having a 90-page investment contract read to him (mandatory under German law; § 13 BeurkG) by a notary that then charged €30,000. That was for his first company. His second company, needless to say, was not incorporated in Germany.
I think the case of TLA+ and most, not all, but most formal methods, they shine the most in highly computational domains, where most of the problems are highly technical and not like business embedded.
I think that you owe it to in that moral contract to your good employees to fire the weak people. And they're not bad people. They may be really smart. They are not effective in your organization. They are not taking hills.
In the same way we owe our you we have a responsibility to our users we have a responsibility to our engineers or our builders people who are in the factory building and so I said there there should be a moral contract if you're going to take that hill I'm going to show you that I am going to work just as hard to unlock value out of the work you did
A digital service team that works with an agency that continues to hire and manage for the same jobs they did last year, and structures the work in the same way it did last year, is just a tourist.
Even for back end, it can be a problem because if you have a request incoming right when it checks all of your objects like you have some sort of latency spike where you it takes much longer to to reply. So that's one of the reasons it can be helpful in in back end as well.
I've always been opinionated about how software should work. Mainly, it should be fast. The bounds of it should be "knowable." The contract you have with it should be "sane" (i.e., you just own it).
But they said, "Look, in the end, actually the only way to actually get a real brain in the VAT is actually to have a brain in a body." And it could be a robot body, but you still need a brain in the body. So I don't think LLMs will get there because they can't. You really need to be embedded in a world, at least that's the E-four idea.
I think that specifically the question why is there something rather than nothing? does not have the kind of answer that we would ordinarily attribute to why questions because typical why questions are embedded in the universe. And when we answer them, we take advantage of the features of the universe that we know and love. But the universe itself, as far as we know, is not embedded in anything bigger or stronger, and therefore it can just be.
the approach that I use is called Schema Therapy, and Schema Therapy is designed to work with very complex personality types, personality disorders, and even those that are happening along a spectrum
The lesson is that connecting with others starts with recognizing that people are so different, especially in how they communicate. But there’s a much broader lesson embedded in this book if you read between the lines.
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.