[jacking off motion] great 🙄
-
@cthos @Doomed_Daniel @aud and thus the gravitational pull towards "simply take control of the entire market" and from there's a hop, skip, and a jump to fascism.
can't have debts if you don't have living creditors
@SnoopJ@hachyderm.io @Doomed_Daniel@mastodon.gamedev.place @cthos@mastodon.cthos.dev I was just thinking about how "just accept shit sucks always" is basically how fascism "works" in the first place, so...
-
@Doomed_Daniel @SnoopJ @aud I did see a plausible argument that they don't actually want to recoup their investement and are just interested in messing up society, but I don't personally believe that.
-
@cthos @SnoopJ @aud
I mean, for now "doing something with AI" boosts stock prices, who cares what happens when the bubble bursts, the people in charge only need to make sure to sell a enough shares before that happensit's not like MBA brains ever cared about things further away than the next annual accounts
-
@Doomed_Daniel @cthos @aud "believe" may be too strong a word for the individuals caught up in the corporate machine (aside from the ones who are literally in a cult) and the machine itself does not have belief (wrong species)
-
@Doomed_Daniel @cthos @aud "believe" may be too strong a word for the individuals caught up in the corporate machine (aside from the ones who are literally in a cult) and the machine itself does not have belief (wrong species)
@Doomed_Daniel @cthos @aud and at some point belief has really nothing to do with it and the economics just spiral naturally
I recently listened to a summary of the Chinese bike-share market craze of the mid 2010s recently and they did a good job making it clear that once ofo and Mobike were locked into a subsidy race, there really wasn't any way out except merger, and merger was unthinkable in the face of the sunk costs in that fight to that point
Has me thinking about the analogies to today's subsidies, except that there are businesses ($NVDA) who are benefitting from all that squabbling, at least temporarily, and the higher-ups will surely get the bigger end of the wishbone when the sell-offs start rolling in.
-
@Doomed_Daniel @cthos @aud and at some point belief has really nothing to do with it and the economics just spiral naturally
I recently listened to a summary of the Chinese bike-share market craze of the mid 2010s recently and they did a good job making it clear that once ofo and Mobike were locked into a subsidy race, there really wasn't any way out except merger, and merger was unthinkable in the face of the sunk costs in that fight to that point
Has me thinking about the analogies to today's subsidies, except that there are businesses ($NVDA) who are benefitting from all that squabbling, at least temporarily, and the higher-ups will surely get the bigger end of the wishbone when the sell-offs start rolling in.
@SnoopJ @Doomed_Daniel @aud But NVDA is also just tossing around the same $100 bn to all of the people who then pay them, and so the circular economics are just ... fraud levels of wild right now.
And at some point those data center workers want to get paid in real money.
So it's unclear just how cleanly they'll get away from this too.
-
@SnoopJ @Doomed_Daniel @aud But NVDA is also just tossing around the same $100 bn to all of the people who then pay them, and so the circular economics are just ... fraud levels of wild right now.
And at some point those data center workers want to get paid in real money.
So it's unclear just how cleanly they'll get away from this too.
@cthos@mastodon.cthos.dev @SnoopJ@hachyderm.io @Doomed_Daniel@mastodon.gamedev.place I suspect that when the bubble pops, any money that could be exfiltrated will likely already have been through one method or another by various parties... and/or they'll cry for a bailout
which will probably make me go full ass nuclear, honestly -
and doing so took the model ~336,500 tokens
For reference, the final merged document is about 20 KB of text, so conservatively about 8 tokens per byte processed (assuming I started with 2x 20 KB docs which is overestimating)
Woof.
unsurprisingly, the more I look, the more I find to fix
I don't have the patience required to babysit this thing
-
unsurprisingly, the more I look, the more I find to fix
I don't have the patience required to babysit this thing
credit where it's due, the model did spot a few mistakes in the original, and it did do a tidy job of re-arrangement
I dunno, I am reminded of watching my mother follow her robot vacuum around the house, watching it like a hawk.
-
credit where it's due, the model did spot a few mistakes in the original, and it did do a tidy job of re-arrangement
I dunno, I am reminded of watching my mother follow her robot vacuum around the house, watching it like a hawk.
@SnoopJ "Don't worry little buddy, we'll get you back to your charger. Whoops you ate a cable again."
-
credit where it's due, the model did spot a few mistakes in the original, and it did do a tidy job of re-arrangement
I dunno, I am reminded of watching my mother follow her robot vacuum around the house, watching it like a hawk.
@SnoopJ I'd favourite the whole thread but instead I'll just say thanks at the end.
-
@SnoopJ I'd favourite the whole thread but instead I'll just say thanks at the end.
@GeoffWozniak no problem, just kinda dumping my head out really
-
credit where it's due, the model did spot a few mistakes in the original, and it did do a tidy job of re-arrangement
I dunno, I am reminded of watching my mother follow her robot vacuum around the house, watching it like a hawk.
I will say that this is the first time I've felt the pull of "just turn your mind off, vibe with it"
I hated it
-
credit where it's due, the model did spot a few mistakes in the original, and it did do a tidy job of re-arrangement
I dunno, I am reminded of watching my mother follow her robot vacuum around the house, watching it like a hawk.
@SnoopJ Relatedly I'm very curious if you reexamine this tomorrow or a week from now if you have the same subjective assessment of the work.
-
I will say that this is the first time I've felt the pull of "just turn your mind off, vibe with it"
I hated it
It's substantially more work to pay attention to what's going on, to review each change, even on this small task.
It was a MUCH bigger lift to read and review the result than it would have been if I'd written it from scratch, although to some extent this could have been because of the nature of the task.
Anyway, I can see how regular use causes erosion steadily.
-
@SnoopJ Relatedly I'm very curious if you reexamine this tomorrow or a week from now if you have the same subjective assessment of the work.
@cthos me too
The blast radius if any of the model's mistakes slipped my attention should be small and something we can deal with easily, but the anxiety is quite unpleasant.
Would have much rather done this for myself.
-
It's substantially more work to pay attention to what's going on, to review each change, even on this small task.
It was a MUCH bigger lift to read and review the result than it would have been if I'd written it from scratch, although to some extent this could have been because of the nature of the task.
Anyway, I can see how regular use causes erosion steadily.
I am impressed that I was able to point at two JSONSchema files and say "these should fit into the same trenchcoat, combine them", especially as I have not personally worked with "conditional schema validation" (introduced in draft 7) before.
So at least I learned something that I can take with me from the exercise.
-
It's substantially more work to pay attention to what's going on, to review each change, even on this small task.
It was a MUCH bigger lift to read and review the result than it would have been if I'd written it from scratch, although to some extent this could have been because of the nature of the task.
Anyway, I can see how regular use causes erosion steadily.
@SnoopJ it really feels… gross, doesn’t it? corrupting? like a warm blanket for the mind that reeks of mildew. this is pure aesthetics I know but the more interactions I have with it the worse it gets
-
It's substantially more work to pay attention to what's going on, to review each change, even on this small task.
It was a MUCH bigger lift to read and review the result than it would have been if I'd written it from scratch, although to some extent this could have been because of the nature of the task.
Anyway, I can see how regular use causes erosion steadily.
@SnoopJ this is why I'm still trying to avoid the temptation
-
I am impressed that I was able to point at two JSONSchema files and say "these should fit into the same trenchcoat, combine them", especially as I have not personally worked with "conditional schema validation" (introduced in draft 7) before.
So at least I learned something that I can take with me from the exercise.
But it was like a breath of fresh air to finish with the schema work, then point `datamodel-code-generator` (a deterministic tool) at those files and generate corresponding Pydantic model code for the schema.
Not only was that Python code *much* easier to review (not the model's fault, JSONSchema is just very difficult for me to read) but it was just… so nice to be touching a tool whose behavior I can rely on. I didn't need to check its work very closely at all, because I know that it's applying a fixed set of well-characterized rules to generate those models from the (equally well-defined) schema.
