hbcdbff

I tend to agree with your position.

But also, look at where almost all technological innovation has happened in the last 50 years

I always ignore warnings like this and am usually never affected by such audio but I feel psychologically scarred by it

Highly recommend anyone reading to not make the same mistake

> the EU is a tech powerhouse

Lmfao

Slop

“A tie wins a district for nobody”

I hate this AI slop text

Slop

Elsie would be a completely wrong way of transcribing Else in most Germanic language.

Elsa would be closer.

Or “Elseh”.

I suspect that people will end up focusing on exercise and self-preening (fashion, grooming, etc.).

And possibly physical skills that AI can’t do, like cooking, carpentry, assuming robotics lags behind AGI.

Humans will always collectively and emergently determine some metrics on which sexual selection occurs, whatever happens, and humans will spend their time optimising for those.

Birepo

I want off this train. Please, make it stop…

Being a SWE is now a mix of being a PM and reviewing vibecoded slop all day

I’m surprised to see this username above this comment.

No, the cert can be issued with no (or invalid/junk) SCT and will work fine with clients who don’t check SCT, which is most non-browser interaction.

No we wouldn’t.

Not all TLS traffic involves a browser.

You claimed CT would “definitive”ly prove whether it has or has not been exploited, which is false.

The lack of CT entries only proves that (most likely) browsers were not MITM’d.

CT is great for browsers. Largely irrelevant for anything being fetched outside of a browser.

Almost certainly noticed and quietly exploited by a state actor

Saw a guy the other day in the gym wearing these

I joined many others in giving him a “shit on a shoe” look.

> most require intent or the ability to foresee consequences (i.e., it must be shown that you neglected to take due care).

This behaviour is neglectful

SWE is the most transparent and ungatekept field in human history and it isn’t even close

I don’t really have much sympathy for mathematicians, frankly.

It strikes me that their field previously was quite heavily gatekept, and there was quite a lot of intellectual snobbery.

Seeing them taken down a peg or a hundred is somewhat gratifying.

> I therefore disagree with claims that mathematics is over because machines can prove theorems. Without humans who understand mathematics, there is, quite literally, no human mathematics—a fundamental part of human culture. If we agree that we should not abandon mathematics because poorly understood machines bruise our anthropocentric vision of it, then society will need more mathematicians, not fewer. Like… a lot more.

Seems contradictory to me, referring to math as a field as “human mathematics” in one sentence, then deriding “anthropocentric visions”.

We all end up paying for that though

> They also still fail to solve objectively easy problems on a regular basis

Which?

I’m glad the article used the phrase because it was a useful indicator of the author’s underlying biases

I don’t agree.

The author is trying to positively assert that it’s impossible that AIs have consciousness.

I think you’d be hard pressed to find even the most ardent of AI proponents claiming AIs are _definitely_ conscious. They are almost always claiming something weaker, which is that it is possible.

> However, this parrot can't hope to emulate any serious form of consciousness, and therefore can't ever be capable of intelligent judgment

I often hear this asserted, but never with any actual justification.

Why can it not?

Or perhaps a life not lived

I remember finding the original terminfo Turing completeness article, which was published in 2019, amazing.

In the era of LLMs articles such as these do nothing for me any more.

This article is mostly, if not entirely, LLM-generated. It’s done in a slightly less blatant way than most, but the tells are there, and pangram agrees.

But even if the article was human-written, I’d still not find it impressive now. There’s no way of telling a human was behind the discovery.