bsenftner

Seriously? This is a professional assessment?

> If a tool is worth building and sharing, surely it’s also worth writing a brief summary of what it’s supposed to achieve in your own words?

Next the complaint will be any such description looks like AI slop.

How's about no JS framework and just use the browser APIs? If you want token efficiency, that's the way to go. If you want web app efficiency, that's the way to go too. JS frameworks were always for the horde that does not do the homework, and the horde that wants to talk about it all day long rather than whatever the fuck is the purpose outside of this damn computer.

A robots.txt file is not anything, not enforceable, it's politeness. Of course it was ignored.

If that data is at all important, why is is downloadable?

Because all this animation tech is a moving target, each production's management chooses the software and versions of that software a production will use and then freeze it. So the studios already have in place a subsystem for every production to be running different software for different productions, doing the same jobs as other productions using other software. This allows some experimental renderer to be used in some sequences, and so on, as well as trials of all kinds of software too, such as AI tracking of camera paths, and the soft and hard objects in their view, AI assisted rendering, assisted color timing assistance and then experiments directly with AI video models in a hybrid pipeline.

Jev feels like what happens when people that have had no serious statistics get a glimpse of what statistics makes possible. I'm not talking about the developers of Jev, I'm talking about the uninformed that went all hype cycle on it. It's well designed and the advanced system a good statistical programmer would write.

As a person that worked on the game at EA, I want to see credits. I recognize people in the artwork, they are caricatures of EA staff. It would be nice to see everyone's names, and then include the names of who ported this too.

There is a gargantuan technical challenge right in your face and few to none see it: all this confusion surrounding AI is an example of the tech industry completely fumbling and failing at the communications surrounding AI technology. What to know the biggest technical hole in all of human civilization? How to convey understanding in others, how to gain understanding from those too inarticulate to explain themselves, and the biggest baddie of them all: how to educate human society such that the discussion of disagreements and controversial issues does not trigger conflict and ultimately war.

This may all sound like 'wishy washy soft knowledge' but I don't think it is, that is a false distinction to claim that any problems that originate with communications are a "soft problem" and not worthy of technical or scientific analysis. I say such problems are technically too complex for our smartest. Such problems require huge amounts of empathy and life experience to even begin any level of forward progress capable analysis.

Dentists are quacks, I've never in my 60+ years of life had a dentist I'd trust. I've looked, their industry is managed very poorly; if you want to maintain your teeth in the United States you need to do it yourself. Let them in your mouth, and they will ruin your health and your finances.

I'm currently seeing a lot of developers and AI industry insiders that do not distinguished between the capabilities of their LLM Agent and the added capabilities of the agent harness. They think the capabilities of the agent harness are within the LLM, and in that confusion they are trying to get their agent to make them an agent harness with all these capabilities. But LLM agent harnesses are brand spanking new, how to make these harnesses are not in the training data of their agent, these developers are more or less vibe begging their agents to make them a harness, so it hallucinates the harness architecture. I am seeing a "agent harnesses" that are delusions, the these developers are not strong and experienced enough to realize they are literally doing the worst work they possibly could... And these idiots are the AI leads.

H.G Wells Time Machine has future society split into to: the childish consumer class and the driven engineering class, and the consumer class is the food of the engineering class. I could see this happening, with how cruel so many are, and trying to institutionalize that attitude.

It helps if the author does not confuse what LLMs actually do with the general misunderstanding that "LLMs do work". They do not "do work" and have never "done work", and this misunderstanding is all over tech.

What do LLMs to? You know this: they are sentence completion engines, that through this process of sentence completion can be used to create software than then "does work". This indirection is critical, it is "how this works" and is the true power of LLMs that is STILL not being recognized. The power of LLMs is their communications capacity, their ability to complete sentences, which is so subtle the entire world of software engineers and artificial intelligence everybody has not identified that simple "variable expansion" as the true power of LLMs. LLMs do not do work, they enable the creation of software that then does work.

With a technology so subtle, want to know what is inevitable? A bifurcation of the population into those that believe in magic and those that understand it well enough to make magic nobody considered possible. Why did I say "magic"? Because people are giving up understanding, and that makes what we do magic.

It is not "they are withholding information", it is more an issue of, and this is not just formal mathematics, not enough emphasis on communicating to be understood, and the education that we all receive not really including how to communicate our specializations to anyone but a peer or a boss.

These formal educations we receive are half baked. We cannot use them without other specialists, specialists we specialists ourselves probably cannot afford. We cannot discuss what we do with anyone but other specialists of our same color and stripe, the same star shape on our bellies. We're not being taught how to communicate, not really, not in general, not in a manner that enables us to function without some corporate apparatus extracting the maximum while always offering statistically less than the market average.

What I meant by knowledge not remaining difficult once understood is that there is a collective consciousness hurdle that we as a society can move on. Once how to express difficult ideas and controversial question and answer exchanges become better understood in general, and once how to handle situations that currently cannot even be discussed due to the emotions they stir become less emotional storms and become logical frameworks people can discuss in abstract, then we become a more functional society than we are now.

I am advocating for effective communications, it is not as if knowledge once understood remains difficult. To communicate and convey understanding is good, and to withhold understanding is tyranny.

The future of "math" is not just solving, but communicating what was solved, and why that solving is important. "Math" as a discipline is only ever been half created, they abandoned explaining themselves like it was beneath them. Well, now in "Math 1.0 finally whole" they will be explaining what they did to the rest of us. If you can't explain you are not really there.

AGI is when AI models no longer need any training at all, because they have comprehension, meaning human science finally developed artificial comprehension, which we have not yet. Calling what we have now AGI is sycophant talk.

drives me up the wall, this shifting definition of AGI; folks, when we no longer need to train AI models at all because we have finally developed artificial comprehension is AGI. This propaganda imposed definition is for fools and sycophants.

Imagine the wild fire when maliciously crafted plugins start being created, as you know they already are...

I've been using "Mad Computer Scientist" for 26 years now as my official title.

What laws and regulations? IP theft, of published media, to the scale of "all of it". If it were music and film and not text, the music & film industries would have nuked Silicon Valley by now. Which shows the relative power of popular media versus text publishing.

Unless you were in elementary school during or before the early 1960s, you have no experience in what debate used to be and how it was part of the fabric of everyday culture.

Debate used to be prime time entertainment, and Sunday was not all sports, it was political news debating, without any name calling either.

Yeah, you describe the ruined debate that was created during the late 70's early 80's and never recovered any of the positive aspects of the former debate skill set.

I see this as a manifestation of the loss of teaching effective communication skills. This takes a moment to explain, so please slow down and consider this: before the cultural revolutions of the 1960's, general education included more emphasis on communications conflicts and resolutions of them. For example, every school had a debate team, and the various forms and rules of debate were common knowledge. Yes, this is true. Debate and watching people skilled at argumentative discussion used to be a popular form of entertainment. Then, during the cultural revolution of the 1960s, the best or the "stars of debate" all sided with the youth culture and not the establishment. That then triggered the removal of debate from educations, from entertainment, and from public life. Now, decades later we have the situation that groups of adults cannot form without conflicts and arguments that drive the community creation aspects away. We have created a culture that cannot communicate, because we have stopped teaching basic oral conflict negotiation of any form.

Owners of Reddit also own these companies.

Took 10 minutes to find this: TLA+ is a formal specification language developed to design, model, document, and verify reactive systems.

This is really amazing, and it reminds me of an Excel modification I did 24 years ago for an animation studio. They had around 3,000 digital artists and then about 200 support staff, and around 8 different productions moving through the studio at the same time. Each production was at some different stage of completion. The studio's production management staff spent a huge amount of time negotiating what staff was assigned to what productions, and the reasonings were all hazy and non-fact based. So I wrote what people would now call a deep learning system that mined all the accounting and production tracking records the studio had, and created probability distributions and confidence intervals for every individual and every task, and every combination of people and their combined tasks, and that all composited together into a giant predictive engine of real time whatif scenarios for the entire studio in different configurations.

It was used for a series of feature films you all probably saw: the Chronicles of Narnia series, the Scooby Doo live action CG films, the Garfield films with the CG Garfield, and Life of PI.

People both loved and hated it. They loved the insights into the studio's capabilities, and they hated thinking through how the thing operated, and they hated the thought process of constructing a new whatif scenario, because they had to THINK.

I worked as an animator for years, the work sucks, well, the specific act of animating life is fun, but that's like 20% at most of the job, the rest is politics and coming to terms with the massive out of control exploitation that is the animation industry. Tear it all down.

Well, spoken exchanges are not expected to be neutral. That's part of the nuance of communications. Yes, oral conversations are noisy, easy to dominate and speakers can lie, which is also part of the lessons within understanding how to communicate well. Lessons that somehow magically also teaches a person to plan their communications, to employ both critical analysis and secondary considerations in reflection of their audience. And to do that in real time while conversing.

Comparing the lax and informal communications of our modern experiences, it is no wonder that people cannot imagine the environment a community a quality communications creates.

Our collective communications experiences are argument from status, not from effectiveness, but that is not to say effective communications and the completely other environment it creates does not exist. Socrates speaks of that environment, not our modern failure to communicate above 5-grade levels.

Socrates comes from a period, the tail end of that period, where all learning was oral. Writing was "new". He observed, which is provable and true, that learning from a written word perspective is a weaker form of learning than from an oral perspective. From the simple fact that when information is delivered orally, questions can be asked, it is a 2-way communication. Not so with writing. With writing, the student must follow their reading with additional oral use and trial uses of the information, or it is lost completely. While that same information initially gained in understanding via oral lessons can often be put to use immediately, the oral instructional path is more complete, it allows questions and answers during the learning process. While a written lesson requires human interactions to supplement that learning for it to hold.