checkyoursudo

When I was young and spry, I used to compile them with every new minor revision. Now, it is just maybe a couple times per year. I think that cooling it on how often I do it has helped it not become annoying.

Where did I say that everyone should speak only English? I do not care what language people speak.

> Are you trying to make a point or..?

Why are you being unkind? Or hostile, or whatever this is?

I was asking a question. I understand that people think they will lose something if they speak a different language. My native language is not the same as any of my ancestors from just a few generations ago, and I want to know what difference it makes?

I just think that people are more worried about the homogenization of language than they need to be. In fact, with how quickly culture is homogenizing around the world, I think that it is even possible that language differences outlast cultural differences over the medium term. Teenagers in a lot of the world I have been to in the past years dress/behave/express themselves ... not very differently.

Everywhere I go in the world, old shit is different, but modern shit is depressingly the same, or really similar anyway.

My children are natively fluent in two languages. Neither of their languages is a second language.

Which language should I tell them is their primary language?

What does "live-action shoot" mean in this statement? Wouldn't this just be "still photography"? When I think of live action, I think of people or at least ... action?

I am a little surprised that ruth is spelled that way instead of like rueth, which seems more like how I would expect it to be said.

Or was it more one-directional, such that engines can be called motors but motors should not be called engines?

1. Fiduciary duty has a specific legal meaning that is not really applicable here.

2. Corporations are not responsible solely to their shareholders.

One problem in niche areas is that sometimes there are only so many people working on a particular problem and only so many different papers/authors to cite.

I will go ahead and claim that it is not like anything to be a bat (iykyk; see the Nagel reference in TFA). And, frankly, questions of consciousness have become a bit boring to me, despite being the focus of my interest for decades now.

Questions of intelligence, communication, social organization, etc are interesting. But questions about a consciousness phenomenon that may or may not even be real and has literally no consensus about theory or fundamental meaning across many disciplines? Boring.

Get back to me when even a bare majority of philosophers and researchers can agree on a definition of consciousness.

I am not sure what NATO should be winning. We are not currently, formally at war, so to me that seems like winning enough. If NATO is not winning, then who is?

Literally cannot win.

This is a function of the language model itself. By the time you get to the output, the uncertainty that is inherent in the computation is lost to the prediction. It is like if you ask me to guess heads or tails, and I guess heads, I could have stated my uncertainty (e.g. Pr [H] = .5) before hand, but in my actual prediction of heads, and then the coin flip, that uncertainty is lost. It's the same with LLMs. The uncertainty in the computation is lost in the final prediction of the tokens, so unless the prediction itself is uncertainty (which it should rarely be based on the training corpus, I think), then you should not find an LLM output really ever to say it does not understand. But that is because it never understands, it just predicts.

In fact, without something like criminal penalties, why would the board encourage safer/legal business practices? Seems like they might equally say, well that was a good run now find us another dastardly product that can bring our prices back down to our competitors.