dandellion

The same Disney that replaced dead actors with CGI? They'll jump at the first chance they get.

The old "the bigger number is better", GPT announces model 6.1, the obvious thing to do next is to announce Gemini 27, and after that Claudé 3000, then a flute album.

For something as abstract as education, is there such a thing as a "point of no return"? It's not obvious to me that's something that degrades in the same way that climate or a physical system does, even if we can draw some parallels. I do think it's still a useful analogy, for example, it would imply that even though we're only starting to notice the ripples of that instability now, it has the implication that fixing it things would mean having to address much more than just what's apparent, we'd also have to fix everything that lead to this mess over the last few decades.

I don't have an X account, and I only use xcancel when someone sends me a link. The reason it's impossible to completely avoid both of them, at least in my corner of the world is that a lot of public organisms seem to think publishing information online exclusively on Twitter is okay, and if you complain they tend to ignore you (I admit I haven't tried complaining about it on Twitter, which seems to be the only thing that works these days).

You could make it 99% of the time a normal phone booth and 1% you get the Matrix easter egg, that would be even more fun.

But how is it different? Because I live in one of those 27 member states, and I'm pretty sure that we had our own regulations before, that they were different from the other 26 states, and that any companies doing business here had to comply with them. Or is it that they were not complying with regulations before and now they will have to?

I think this is the most accurate take on this thread. I've written super optimised code in assembly and SIMD. But only for contests never at work, because I've never had an employer that cared to optimise things that far, they just wanted cheap software that worked just good enough to get the job done. Even in places where they actually cared about quality would usually prefer adding a couple features over optimising things that much.

It'll be a little startup from San Francisco called "El Goog".

I remember people moving the goalposts like that since, let me check... when did AI Dungeon go viral? Wow, 2019.

The same thing they always do?

I don't see why these colors would be any more truer than the ones before. I bet they would change again just as quick if winds went back to blowing the other way. The only color they care about is the green of money. And if you asked them why they supported it they'd get all forgetful and not remember ever supporting any of that.

There are only like three or four that aren't just flat buttons with a different border radius and colour. If this had been done in the mid 2000s it would have hundreds of entirely different looking buttons. Glassy buttons, metal buttons, glowing buttons, pixel art buttons, cartoon buttons, etc.

Why would anyone pull it? When I want slop I just ask the AI to generate some exactly the way I like it.

One sentence into that readme I can tell you that yes, it most definitely counts as slop.

This is Microsoft we're talking about, they'd never do the glaringly obvious solution when mindless bureaucracy is an option.

Yes, as soon as models come out that can write properly, we'll all instantly get over it. Until then we'll be having this discussion over and over, as many times as it is necessary.

Your vibes are definitely better than his vibes.

There are already more game dumps and mods than anyone can play in single lifetime. There are plenty games without DRM and always-online protections in GOG alone.

You'll never be able to agree on where that line should go. First because there's a cultural component to it. I'm from Spain so I can only talk for myself, but while he uses rude language, nothing I've ever read from him ever seemed particularly offensive. And second because any activity involving a large group of people will need some amount of toxicity if only to prevent other toxic people from derailing it, and since nobody thinks of themselves as the one that is being toxic to the project, there will always be some friction. You might not like fevers either, but they are necessary for a functioning immune system.

Top 5 games on steam alone account for 50% of the player base, their player base estimations are (as per Google) 4-9% female for the most played (Counter-Strike), 3.5-6% for the second one, <15% the third, ~25% fourth, ~10% fifth. Of the other games in the top 100 about 75% are other equally male-skewed games, and that makes for more than 90% of all players. You might not want to make assumptions based on that "little to no information", but I'm more than happy to, because it's obvious. Your 20 years might not line up with that, my friends list does not align with that either. But that doesn't change the very obvious reality that Steam is mostly guys.

Anyway, I don't particularly care about discussing with you because you obviously enjoy your head buried in the sand, so I'll leave you to it. I just wanted to make sure anyone who ends on this thread can see that just with some quick napkin numbers it's trivial to estimate, with pretty good confidence, what should already be obvious to anyone who has ever been on Steam: that it's a sausage fest.

Obviously when they make an ad they'll hire actors and show whoever they want, because it makes their product look good, or it aligns more with the image they want to project, or whatever. That is fine.

My comment was because the thread went down the topic of what the actual player base of Steam is like and whether the ad was reflective of that. I just pointed out that it's very obviously not reflective because it's easy to tell what the actual user base is like just from public stats and extrapolating a bit, even being very conservative, it's mainly guys.

Cool story. Obviously wrong. You only need to go on steamdb and use two brain cells:

Counter-Strike 2, Dota 2, PUBG and Apex Legends are almost 50% of the active players on any given day. They're PVP games, and their playerbase is >=90% male (it's obvious to anyone who has played them but you don't need to take my word for it, it's easy to verify). So the only way for what you say to be true would be for all other games on Steam to not by played by guys at all, which is not the case cause the "long tail" of Steam is Path of Exile, EA Sports, Forza Horzion, Cyberpunk, Destiny, etc.

Yes, there are other games that have a more balanced player base. There's Stardew Valley and others like that. Just go look at their player numbers, they're dwarfed by the most played. Steam player base skews massively to guys, anyone who things otherwise is wrong, and if the person that I was replying to doesn't see the same stats it's obvious that they're just in a bubble.

I'm not clearing up confusion, I'm letting you know it's pretty easy for everybody to see that you're wrong. If you want to continue being wrong just because the method used doesn't meet your very rigorous standards, suit yourself. Emperor's new clothes and all that.

They're two separate shots that's for sure. I mean, otherwise you'd see the other camera taking the shot from the opposite perspective so...

Go on Steam, look at the most played games right now, look at the demographics for those games.

Or pick some player profiles at random, count how many girls vs guys you find (very easy to tell with high accuracy just by looking at the games they play, yes there are exceptions but they're actually quite rare, I promise you can get >90% accuracy after you do a few).

Steam user base is at least 3/4 male by user count, probably even more by play time.

Same. We replicated some data from Postgres, it was easy to set up, similar enough that the transition was trivial, and really good performance out of the box. One of those good "use the right tool for the job" experiences.

Whether you or me or Anthropic think it was pushing back or not is besides the point.

You can't justify trillions of market cap just serving the US market, and they've just kneecapped their ability to compete anywhere else, it would be delusional to invest on something like this thinking it's going to be a free market, you'd just be indirectly funding the US government ability to use AI against others, especially if you are a non-US citizen (or a subgroup of US citizens they don't like). The near-term world-ending is just pure marketing, they haven't shown anything nearly as impressive as they've been promising, and the software they've produced so far with near infinite access to agents has been very impressively bad.

Yes, there have always been bad programmers. The only difference is that now thanks to AI anybody can be a bad programmer. You've got people out there contributing sloppy code like only a bad "10x engineer" could do before. Good code is still hard to write, and from what I have seen in 3 companies so far, the people who write good code with AI are pretty much the same ones that were writing good code before AI.

I'm sure if a dev can show useful results at 1k they won't have trouble getting permission for a higher cap as well.