We are speedrunning legacy "codebases" all the time. Or do you conjure up your own pickaxe, mine your own minerals, produce your own electricity, and construct your own computers and networks first before you go off to develop an application? Would you even know how to do those things? That is all enormous legacy codebase that we speedrun all the time. Just add one more to it.
When I use a library someone understood it when they shipped it. It also had a long stabilisation period where bugs were fixed in it. When I use an LLM, potentially nobody understands what was just shipped and it has had no time to stabilise.
But when I'm using all of those things (pickaxe, mineral mine, power station, internet network hub), I know that there was a thinking human being that took some measure of human care and consideration when creating them. And that there are people on the other side of the economic transaction to talk to or hold accountable when something goes wrong.
Should the goal really be to build a system that we completely understand, or build a system that solves a problem? Like we dont fully understand quantum physics, yet good enough to build helpful systems on top of it. Or like not knowing exactly what every bee in a hive does at any moment, yet still reliably harvesting honey in the end? I think people have this modernist desire for absolute truths and certainty, where the world we live in clearly is postmodern. There are no certainties, only probabilities. So embrace the chaos, try to build systems that help to contain entropy for some useful purposes, and accept that all of them will eventually fail in some way and you will need to course correct. Faulkner is dead, long live Pynchon
Someone needs to verify it works enough to trust the output. Of course some things are more critical than others. I don't worry too much about a badly written game, just is it fun - but I still don't want it to delete or transfer my money while I'm playing. However there are also systems where people die if it fails and those need to have a lot more trust/understanding.
I will remember and care. Like I still remember and care and will not buy a Tesla, as long as there are other options that are 80% as good, and usually for most products, there are.
Because the person who owns this company is using this very money to elect evil people that wreck havoc in the world and I dont want to have anything to do with that
I'm reminded by the character Russell Crowe portrayed in the film Body of Lies when he reminded DiCaprio's character that "no one is innocent in this shit, Ferris." before he declined his job offer.
When does a fad stop being a fad and start being a canon or an icon or whatever? Is Shakespeare a fad? As a 8 years old I knew all Pokémons by name their powers and I have spent literally all my pocket money on Pokémon, and now almost 30 years later people still seem to dig it. Also I don’t think it ever really went away in the meanwhile too. But yeah it could also just be millennial nostalgia and the cyclical nature of cultural products which over and over resurfaces and recycles and remixes the stuff from the past
It's a joke, people have been calling Pokemon a fad since 1998. Pokemania in the early 2000s was bigger than the Pokemon Go moment in 2016. But Pokemon endures.
How is remotely save obsidian plugin mentioned only once here? I set it up with a OneDrive I was already using anyway to host and sync my vault there. I have it set up and synced on 4 devices with 4 different os (win11, macos, ios, android) and it works great and is free.
Let me provide a counter argument: with the graph you can browse your notes visually in 2D, instead of just the usual list. You can just take notes as usual, easily add #tags and [[links]] in them, and then when you go to graph view you can see connections between those links and you can color code or filter tags. You get a global graph view of all your vault, and local view of any note. Links and tags are literally the core Obsidian features and the graph view sits on top of that. For me that is a coherent vision and utility.
Sorry, the lack of vision I referred to related to Obsidian's leadership -- unserious D&D kids largely unconcerned with usability, performing security theatrics with sync e2ee while their users data is regularly at risk of mass exfiltration via their insanely dangerous community plugin ecosystem.
The on-screen appearance of the feature you're referring to may be visual and coherent, I'm just pointing out that users frequently cite theoretical or anticipated benefits of this feature, not real ones.
lets get concrete with "Exercise": what is one unit of exercise? like exactly what type of movement, at what intensity and duration should be performed how frequently to be as effective as therapy? like should i run every day at 160bmp for 20 minutes? whats the minimum effective dose?
If you take a "brisk" 20 minute walk every day, you'll meet the recommended weekly amount of aerobic exercise for Americans. (I think people should do more.)
The actual amount you need to exercise, or the intensity, is not very big. The good thing with exercise is also that once you make it a habit to walk, say, 20 minutes a day, then walking 25 minutes a day becomes pretty trivial, and so on.
Anecdotally, when I’m depressed, a brisk walk does very little. I need to run to the point where I get the endorphins flowing and there is pain from the lactic acid buildup.
There are no units of exercise and no units of depression either.
In my opinion the best measure of exercise is perceived effort. So while you're asking for objective answers, I think a lot of this is inherently subjective.
The benchmark you're asking for is also ill-defined. For example: How frequently to be as effective as what type and what frequency of therapy?
Say that again real slow and listen to your words.
The fact that social conventions are arbitrary is wholly irrelevant. Everyone knows, and you are not smart or insightful for pointing it out. Social norms and conventions are arbitrary, evolved constructs. Individually we follow social norms as this is how you get accepted by and participate in society.
Breaking the social norms is generally punished either directly or indirectly. Because human society evolved to favor group cohesion, and acting counter to the rules means you no longer wish to be part of the group.
I'd also add that it's not about the relevance of the conventions, but one's (in)ability to "read the room" and follow the conventions signals to others how well-adapted (or "aligned") of a human they are.
Not following conventions may be a result of inability to recognize them or outright disrespect and/or unwilling to cooperate, play by rules, honor the social contract, etc.
In this case its about showing good judgement. Good judgement is putting the unity of the group above your own petty rivalries, when all the group is asking you to do is hold hands for a photo.
If he holds hands for the photo, it is not going to materially change whether OpenAI outperforms Anthropic or vice versa, but what it shows is a certain level of maturity - Im mature enough to understand the situation here is the projection of ultimate unity, of a greater mission that humanity is all here together, even though our system puts us in competition with each other, and for a moment, I will show that (just like everyone else standing here) I can rise above it, and hold hands for a photo.
It's not a big ask in a physical sense, but its an appeal to the wisdom that ultimately we are all on the same team together on this little floating rock, and maybe, just maybe, for a tiny second, it would be good to acknowledge that.
Violence sometimes absolutely is the right response. Let me quote some George Orwell:
"Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. "
reply