Turskarama

6000 years ago was about the time of the last interglacial period so likely it was ice free at that time.

As was stated "normal" is not really a useful framing. It has at various times been both "normal" for the glaciers to extend much further south, and it has also been "normal" for the earth to have no glaciers at all. When thinking about climate change the issue is not that the climate IS changing, but rather how quickly. There is no evidence that global climate has ever changed as quickly as it is today, with the fastest rates we have evidence for being on the order of 1 degree every thousand years, as compared to the current rate of about 1 degree per 50 years.

The government that is most likely to use your data against you is the government of the country you live in. If a foreign government wanted to use your data against you the easiest way for them to do it would ironically be to send it to your government.

It adds fiber, which is the key. The main weakness of ice as a crystal is that as soon as a crack forms it can spread along imperfections in the crystal structure. Putting fibre in it bridges those gaps and stops the cracks before they can get big enough to cause significant weakening.

If it's a publicly traded company then literally yes, public companies are mandated to make as much money for their investors as possible. It's a very stupid law but there it is.

An enterprise grade VPN is pretty damn safe. A government could probably get in but then a government probably isn't going to bother hacking your fridges to defrost.

That's effectively what "require a VPN" means. You can simply block any connection that doesn't come through the VPN.

I don't think the power tools analogy really works. Using power tools doesn't make you less skilled at carpentry, it just makes you less skilled at using hand tools specifically. If you then need to use hand tools later, you need to learn the hand tool skills but the carpentry skills are still there, and that's the more technical skill that takes longer to learn. In this sense the power tool analogy is more like using an IDE vs just a text editor.

Using AI to code is more like using a laser cutter for carpentry. You get the large pieces out which you then glue together, but if you needed to make those same pieces using either power tools OR hand tools you'd have a much harder time learning how to do it.

I'm way too late to edit this post so I should be clear: I did mean "doing stuff" clubs not "loud music and dancing" clubs, though I'm sure they can work for some people too.

Also I wouldn't recommend joining clubs _just_ to try and meet potential partners. You should join a club that's for something you're actually interested in, if you would leave the club just because you failed to meet someone then it was a bad fit from the start.

Clubs are still imo one of the best ways to meet people for all the reasons you give. You have at least one thing in common which is a conversation starter and there's opportunity to meet more people. Also the average person could stand to socialise with strangers more in person.

After it exists it doesn't need to do anything, because it already exists.

They don't want to waste tokens on purpose, what they're actually hiding is when the model wastes tokens on obviously stupid "thoughts".

It can't do anything yet because it doesn't exist, it also can't "feel the need" to do anything for the same reason.

Here's a better antidote that doesn't require any theoreticals beyond those the basilisk already assumes:

1. The Basilisk cannot do anything until it exists

2. Once the Basilisk exists, it doesn't need to do _anything_ to ensure it exists, since it already exists.

That's it. That's the whole rebuttal to the whole stupid thing.

I'm reasonably sure there are more states that could destroy a satellite than hit infrastructure on US soil. And if you try to use an ICBM to hit the US then you risk getting nuked.

Of course it does, if you start filtering people out at random then you have pointlessly introduced the possibility of randomly filtering out the best candidate.

Libraries do a LOT more than that. Abstractions also make LLMs more efficient, and lets some problems be handed off to much cheaper algorithms. They also mean that the way data is handled can be standardized which means you don't have to design an entire protocol from scratch every time you want to send data somewhere.

Every advantage libraries have given us still exists in the world of AI.

People have been told for so long that private companies are more efficient than government that they have started to simply believe it, as if the problems of large scale organisation aren't universal.

Unlike the hacking one, this would be impossible to bullshit as long as the proofs are released. They can be verified independently, and the alternative is that they solved 10 major open mathematical questions without the AI, which seems less likely.

The thing you're missing here is timelines. The reason renewables are expensive is because it requires a grid upgrade to make it work, whereas replacing the old coal generators with new ones wouldn't so much. The kicker is though that once that upgrade is done, maintaining it will be very cheap whereas fossil fuels will continue to get more expensive (both sticker price and the cost of dealing with climate change). It's not like installing more fossil fuels halfway through helps either, we can't use coal to eliminate the duck curve without massively overbuilding it for a huge up front cost. We would need to build enough of it to cover when there is no renewables... which would be enough to never use the renewables at all.

There is a lot of evidence in fact that we have _already_ reached the point where just going all in on renewables is cheaper. People like to point to the last 40 years or so to say fossil fuels are cheaper but that was a time when the rate of new power generation wasn't very high and most power stations had already been built. We are at a point now where just about all of our coal power stations need replacing, and actually doing that would be more expensive than the renewables roll-out.

As for nuclear, the average cost to install and run it _in countries with existing industry_ is also higher than renewables. Despite the costs renewables are actually the cheapest method to get power, even if you add in all the extra associated costs.

If you're actually interested in reading up on this then I can suggest going through the GenCost report https://www.csiro.au/en/research/technology-space/energy/Ele...

Of course if you think the CSIRO is full of paid shills then this won't help, but you should probably have a hard think on who is actually spending the most on lobbying money, which you can also look up quite easily.

> We now have a fully developed app that we are testing but found several features missing.

So not fully developed then.

Sure, but that apparently only costs $500. If you do that once a month then that's still basically free. Hell if you do it once a week it's still about as much as a single cheap employee.

Yes but all of those things are independent of the size of the country, which is the point.

Do you imagine an infrastructure project in ANY country is managed like a project in a small company?

> - The United States is 85 times larger than Switzerland. The entire country of Switzerland is the size of a small US state. Covering the US with broadband is much harder than Switzerland.

I see this argument come up a lot with regards to all kinds of infrastructure, and the thing is it simply _isn't true_.

What matters is population density, GDP per capita, geography, and will. A countries size doesn't matter since twice the area will, all things being equal, also give you twice the workforce to make it happen. In fact the only change a larger area typically makes is better ability to make use of economies of scale, which makes things _easier_.

The only correlation between larger countries and trouble with infrastructure is that a large country is more likely to have large areas with nearly nobody in them, but these areas also typically account for a vanishingly small percentage of the population so they don't really count when people are talking about bad infrastructure.

The difference is that the US companies are using it as a means to an end, they need to make just enough profit that the investors don't all get cold feet before they get to AGI. The Chinese companies on the other hand are trying to be profitable immediately, which means that they're going slower to save development costs.

Just because the users were already sick when they started using ChatGPT doesn't mean that ChatGPT isn't exacerbating the issue. Sickness isn't a boolean condition. A big problem with LLMs in general when it comes to people like this is that they are too sycophantic, they don't push back when you start acting strange and they're too gentle about trying to validate you.

In my experience AI can write _something_ from scratch, but often edge cases won't be handled until I go through and read the results or test it. Usually when I'm writing by hand I will naturally find the majority of edge cases as I go. By the time I've read through the results and fixed said edge cases, I usually would have been faster just doing it myself.

Agile cannot go over budget or scope because those are failures of planning. Agile is the methodology that was developed specifically to counteract those problems with planning. Projects that use Agile can go over budget and scope but they never do that because they are using Agile, rather they use Agile because they might do that.

Which is fine, the average bike thief is not going to expect to need them.

Yes, there's a reason it was abandoned as a KPI almost as soon as it was introduced. Just because AI is writing the code instead now doesn't magically make it a good metric.