testaccount28

yeah, Tao has been extremely reasonable throughout this, while the coverage has been... maybe 'motivated' is the right word?

you could pause the game between actions, while the model reasons about what to do next.

random sites generally don't log carefully, or watch their logs if they do. so the risk to hacking them is low. this site almost certainly logs very aggressively. so the risk to hacking it is high.

based on differential risk, attackers will choose targets differently. they might reason that the risk/reward on this obvious trap is not worth it. but on joe shmo's php emporium, the reward is less, but so is the risk, and it might pencil out.

investor?

are you really asking? modafinil.

for any fixed size, populating the lookup table is constant.

why do you accuse me of this? i'm deeply uncomfortable with that, as well. it's possible to object for multiple reasons.

if you squint, it's a halfway compelling argument to legalize and regulate. that $1.80 in tax revenue could pay for treatment programs.

(i do not think the second order effects can be ignored so totally; nothing ever goes as planned in this world of madness. don't at me.)

nah dude. i'll allow any finite size lookup table, but not an infinite one.

i mean, presumably so could ukraine?

neat. why can't you put the heat in the mountain?

man, i'd be icked by someone who was cruel to a rock with a face painted on it. let alone a chatbot.

with such a fat harness, this is more like watching a walk thru play the game.

yeah i mean i'm gonna chalk that one up to the nukes.

the optimizer controls the future. it doesn't kill humans directly, it just outcompetes them for all resources, including livable human environment.

climate change was never going to kill all humans.

4) Realizes the best path for it to not be detected is to create a distraction - like hacking into a random ai-related target that it could plausibly believe has the answer key to its task, creating a captivating but ultimately hollow news cycle.

> we'd have to prove that firing the gun caused the murder. how would we do this? we'd need to redo the murder many times, with and without my client firing his pistol. that's extremely expensive and not really feasible. therefore, we must acquit.

what is "the engagement algorithm"?

i'm sorry you're feeling upset about this.

this is also good! we can have both.

in the examples i can think of, this happens mostly because the company provides a product or service that is valuable to many, and shares the surplus with consumers. i am thinking about companies like microsoft, apple, netflix, google, stripe, walmart, costco, albertson's, starbucks, sysco.

what are the companies you are thinking about?

could you explain your perspective more?

i see it as: large companies are proof that much trade and consumption has occurred.

the sentinelese are sovereign, in my book. we could go do something which we call 'arresting them', i guess, but they would throw spears at us and chase us away, and then we would be at war.

i'm fine with people "living off the land", as long as they don't consume the services my taxes pay for.

colonization is obviously mandatory if we want more land. tax policy does not change that. nor does it make land more or less productive.

i do not support the use of force to seize assets. however, i believe that an overwhelming majority of people would -- upon reflection -- consciously and without duress agree to pay taxes in exchange for a working government.

maybe they vibed up some prompt injections. anyway, nice of them to tell on themselves.

see the font, close the tab

i'm gonna make like three grand. look up the writings of Henry George.

some candid feedback for claude:

    - the demo on the page makes no sound and is visibly off (triggers happen when the token is at the wrong location, or not at all)
    - the demo video is boring
    - it doesn't even _do the thing_? it's just a 1d piano roll in a circle? there's no fun petri net dynamics?

(who is upvoting this?)

you will spend much MUCH more time as a power law user than as a new user, such that almost any % gain in productivity once familiar is worth almost any months of unproductivity when new.

"Make a line of 10 apples and declare it to be 2 units long" <- what number does this physically realize?