zooch

I saw Megalopolis and loved it. Mind you I went in knowing that it was apparently a $100 million Neil Breen flick. That only made me want to see it more though, since I've sat through all of Neil Breen's movies in awe of how bad they were.

Hard for me to call Megalopolis bad though.

It's operatic and impressionistic. People keep asking what it all means, I've never thought you had to know what a movie means to enjoy it.

Something like Southland Tales, meets Tree of Life, meets Neil Breen.

If you switch from sine to square or sawtooth the change in volume is jarring.

Waveforms having the same amplitude doesn't mean the ear hears it at the same volume. There's more frequencies contained in different waveforms and the ear is more sensitive to certain ranges.

A smoother representation of the waveforms might contain the first 5 - 10 frequencies of Fourier series but even then you need to compensate with a change in amplitude.

It's not a DAW, it's a web app, and the users will appreciate the favor.

I would like to have a more modular approach with more specialized training of the models.

Currently I can only really use smaller models for micro-tasks like sentiment analysis or classification, but any type of problem solving has to be left to GPT-4.

With these examples I think the author would still be stuck with stepping through the state machines with the students. Unless what you wrote would allow for the "autonomousPeriodic function to keep ticking" another way?

Came here to mention Nirvana the Band the Show. One of my absolute favourites and I recommend it to everyone.

Blackberry was good as well - don't expect the exact facts, it says right in the beginning it is a fictionalization.

Also, how is typing the questions in an email to a grad student simpler than using the chatGPT UI. He's instructed his own authentic intelligence assistant to interact with the artificial intelligence assistant for him.

For early generations I'd imagine you'd have to plug them in via usb (which would still be fine for my use case I was describing). Processing done on a different device, get some type of AI to summarize datasheets and match it to pins. All of which probably doesn't sound good to you but I'd still prefer it over turning my neck and scrolling back and forth.

But like the parent poster pointed out, I'm now talking about niche industrial uses, not widescale adoption.

I don't think it's a solution looking for a problem. I'd be willing to put them on at work and see which pins on a piece of hardware do what instead of looking back and forth between a datasheet. Lots of examples exactly like that, especially if the glasses are fed sensor data so the temperature/pressure appears right beside the area it is measuring.

Meta is a 10 million dollar company?

My thoughts exactly - rewrite the novel with Mr. Carraway as an ML engineer while maintaining themes/motifs (possible adding new ones too). I'm guessing what's impressive is that these are the first steps towards something like this? Or is it already possible? Someone please correct me here.

No need to be sorry, I'm aware we answer to our biology (not that I have as deep of an understanding of it as you).

We may be splitting hairs because this stemmed from a comment saying thinking is the most pleasurable thing in the world and you said anyone who thinks that way is lying to themselves.

Through your biological lens I have no choice but to agree, the thing that is most pleasurable in the world is mesolimbic dopamine pathway and the neocortex alignment (or so I'm told).

But through a conversational lens I guess it's all how you get there. And thinking->problem solving->success is a plausible path to get there which is why I disagree with your statement that they are lying to themselves, ignoring the existential truth that we are always lying to ourselves.

You make good points and it's true, thinking alone may not have the same effect, but problem solving I'm sure releases endorphins as well.

People do attempt to think themselves into happiness with therapy see some benefit.

Just thinking - yes, probably not going to make anyone extremely happy.

But I still believe it's a plausible argument that after any cycle or combination of sex, drugs, fame, family, friends there may be a point where, for some people, thinking/problem solving may have it's place as the most pleasurable option in that moment.

And the winning combination for some people may be family, friends and problem solving, rather than family, friends and drugs. So it's possible they are not lying to themselves. It may maximize pleasure over time.

I don't know if it's so cut-and-dry. By that logic why doesn't everybody just do amphetamines all day.

Probably some integral of pleasure is part of the equation, and it depends on you preference for pleasure distribution. But maybe I'm blurring the line between pleasure and fulfillment.

I see where this comment is coming from and partially agree with it.

A thought experiment I've put myself through is would I still be pursuing software if I has unlimited access to sex, drugs and entertaining people were magnetically attracted to me.

I don't know the answer to that question, but I've had moments of satiation with regards to those things and I end up learning and/or thinking deeply - and in those moments it is the most pleasurable thing.

This is probably different for everyone because after being satiated being alone and thinking is what I like to do. I've also completely stopped drinking for similar reasons as the grandparent comment.