swlabr @ swlabr @awful.systems

Only Bayes Can Judge Me

---

Read more

Posts

24

Comments

1,048

Joined

2 yr. ago

Good for what? Glue pizza? Unnerving/creepy pasta?

I remember in my OS course we were advised to practice good “netiquette” if we were going to go bother the fine folks on stack overflow. Times have changed

👨🏿‍🦲: how many billions of models are you on

🗿: like, maybe 3, or 4 right now my dude

👨🏿‍🦲: you are like a little baby

👨🏿‍🦲: watch this

glue pizza

It’s only ad-hominem if they discredit your points by insulting you. If they read your points and use them to make statements about your character, that’s not ad hominem, that’s valid inference.

You probably need an example. Let’s say Alice and Beelice are having a conversation.

Alice: “I think seed oils are bad for you because RFK Jr. said so! MAGA!”

If Beelice says: “Alice, you are a real sack of potatoes, and therefore you are wrong,” that’s ad hominem.

If Beelice says: “Alice, if you’re going to parrot RFK Jr, then the worms deserve to eat the rotten flesh in your skull,” that’s plain inference.

Understand now, dear?

If I ever meet an intern for a FOSS project, I’ll buy a lottery ticket

When they say “art” they mean “metaphorical lead paint” and when they say “accessible” they mean “insidiously inserted into your neural pathways”

“Oh man, this brain fog I have sure makes it hard to think. Guess I’ll use my trusty LLM! ChatGPT says lead paint is tastier and better for your brain than COVID? Don’t mind if I do!”

Ok, we are already very far off topic. I actually have heard an interesting take about Terrence Howard and his “New Math”.

(NB: I have an undergrad major in mathematics)

So, one of my favourite comedy podcasts is “My Momma Told Me,” a podcast that talks about black conspiracy theories. In each episode, the topic is framed as “my momma told me <insert conspiracy theory here”. Terrence Howard comes up as a sort of mythological icon on the pod, it’s very funny. On a recent episode they actually get to facetime him, it rules.

Anyway, the take comes from the host Langston Kerman (who does not have a major in mathematics, nor any background in science). It’s a very charitable interpretation that the whole 1x1=2 stuff isn’t so much about creating a new math with different rules, it’s more an expression of the frustration towards the algorithms and calculations that are part of the power structures in society that disadvantage and disenfranchise minority populations. Because this is all being thought of and formulated by people outside of the discipline, anything appearing arithmetic is “math,” so a “new math” is needed.

Basically: it’s kafkaesque. But yeah more likely than not Terrence Howard has gone off the deep end.

From that angle, sure. I’m more sneering at the people who saw what they wanted to see, and the people that were saying “this is good, actually!!!”

If I start using this and add grep functionality to my day-to-day life, I can’t complain about not knowing how to invoke grep in good conscience, dawg. I can’t hold my shitposting back like that, dawg!

jk that looks useful. Thanks!

I bring a sort of biological and technological uniqueness to the collective that the federation doesn’t really like

Man. If this LLM stuff sticks around, we’ll have an epidemic of early onset dementia.

So, basically, there’s no ethical existence in our society? That’s starting to sound like soviet talk. Ronnie Reagan will be hearing about this.

Ackshually, Google became shit when they started posturing as a for-profit entity. Gather round, comrades, let us sing the internationale

Coward

ChatGPT, please tailor my resume and write me a cover letter for all programming positions at teledildonics companies, thanks!

Devin? Fuck Devin. That slimy motherfucker owes me 10 bucks.

1. Perhaps you didn’t read the linked article. Nadella didn’t claim that 30% of MS’s code was written by AI. What he said was garbled up to the eventual headline.
2. We don’t have to play devil’s advocate for a hyped-up headline that misquotes what an AI glazer said, dawg.
3. “Existing code generation codes can write 30%” doesn’t imply that AI possibly/plausibly wrote 30% of MS’s code. There’s no logical connection. Please dawg, I beg you, think critically about this.

NASA programmers grow more powerful by the day. It’s only a matter of time before they reach AGI

Wait, this is a sneer club??? 🧑🏿‍🚀🔫🧑🏿‍🚀