HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

BulgarianIdiot

no profile record

comments

BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
You added a citation, but your cited source is wrong. The external battery is 2hrs. The device can't operate without an external power source.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
Better productivity workflow: a sweaty device you need to carry on your head, with a cable with a battery pack, for the spectacular 2 hours battery life, reproducing low-resolution virtual displays around you, which you are supposed to very productively operate by clumsily making finger gestures around the display (instead of on them).

Yeah, I'll keep my monitors, mouse and keyboard, and my smartphone, thanks.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
Check the historical conflict between Macedonia and Bulgaria. Bulgaria claims Macedonia was always part of Bulgaria, then split off, so they recognized them as an independent country and that was it. Macedonia claims all figures from the region as Macedonian, and calls itself the predecessor of the entire region. They also are highly aggressive against Bulgarians and call them fascists' and oppressors.

All in all sad sight. The smaller the countries, the weaker, the more similar, the more adversarial are they towards one another. It's like a pathological sibling relationship. There's dissonance and each one is fighting to "set the record straight" and dominate.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
I'm in Europe, and every country has different takes of the same historical events. Sometimes not much, but sometimes wildly and drastically. Incompatibly. It's insane to see the dissonance. Americans don't get to see this as much, because the states synchronize more or less, despite the right/left cultural divide.

History is mostly BS. Fairy tales very broadly and crudely constrained by some dates and events. We don't know a thing. And that's one reason we can't learn. The past is recast for propaganda purposes to control the present and the future. Nothing more.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
I didn't do that.

I just said, people who are interested by their own success at the expense of society are in fact analogous to cancer cells, which also broke from the shared programming and optimized for local survival and reproduction.

That's not me morally judging people who are "intrigued by topics". I'm clearly also among those "intrigued" by these topics. I'm just saying it how it is: when higher order breaks down, the more local solution hurts the whole. It's a fact.

We can discuss how selfish people are sometimes useful in society. Because society is complex like that. Maybe true for cancer too, who knows. We really have poor understanding of systems, and clearly are averse to learning more, because someone may get insulted by being compared to cancer. I don't judge cancer, why do you? :D
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
People prefer to hear what matches their expectations & wants, not what is accurate. And that's one problem with AI that keeps getting worse over time rather than better as AI evolves.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
I had the chance to ask raw GPT in times past and let me tell you it spills all those beans and then some. Of course those models are gradually removed today from the playground.

But we still have LLaMA. And more are coming. The question is what we do with this. What if acknowledging psychopathy as beneficial ends up amplifying it, and this becomes the straw to break our society's back?

Thing is, what's beneficial to an individual is not necessarily beneficial to society as a whole. They're often in opposition in extremes. It's like cancer. All cells working together means long-term survival of the animal. Cancer however does not cooperate, steals energy, efs around all the time, reproduces, and basically has a lot more fun than any other cell might. But it also kills the animal long-term.

So what is beneficial? To be cancer or not to be? Depends beneficial to whom. Goals.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
ChatGPT and Bing Chat aren't trying to be safe, really. They're trying to avoid liability for their owners. AI as is is plenty dangerous enough to people who wield it properly (for propaganda, manipulation, hacking, accelerating malicious efforts etc.) even with the guardrails. It's like giving chimps machine guns.

Another issue of AI is the feedback loop. If you tell an AI "help me end my life" and it follows your instructions blindly, it'll end up convincing you to do so, as happened with a young family man recently, and maybe more we haven't heard of.

Existing art has no feedback loop. Movies are unlike AI because it's what they are. They don't follow orders, they just exist as immutable artifacts of human expression back when they were created. So to me it's different.

Oh, and also you'll soon be able to cook a model at home, so all these AI limitations are irrelevant mid-term.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
Absolutely. Because if we don't draw line there, we'll see no end to history (and art is part of history) being rewritten and modified for increasingly inane reasons. And poorly, at that.

We should trust our basic intelligence and judge content in the time period it was made and extract what we find valuable out of it. Anything else suggests either we're stupid, or we want to be treated like we're stupid. And that's a sad future for humanity if so.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
Yes
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
Sanity at last
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
If they are very large and implement copy-on-write, sure, parts of them may be on the heap. But they don't need to be on the heap if they escape if they're just returned by copy.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 3 ans·discuss
The Swift compiler does some of the optimizations/techniques you mention Rust does. It won't reference count, when the setup is possible to analyze statically and elide ref count. Swift also has widely used complex value types, which are stored on the stack. It will also even put some reference types on the stack after doing escape analysis etc.

I don't know which benchmark to trust anymore, but for some reason iOS software tends to seemingly overperform comparable ART (GC) code.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 4 ans·discuss
Yes, it’s subsidized.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 4 ans·discuss
Sorry I said WhatsApp above when I meant WeChat. Video alone is not revolutionary, nor are payments. We don't disagree that much.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 4 ans·discuss
He has compared Twitter to a neural network where we (and bots) are the nodes. I feel this was him mostly trying to sound fancy, but in my mind I'm absolutely gonna grab this and run with it.

Mega-app, the way I understand that term, is not what he's after. He's mentioned that he wants to allow HQ video and compete with YouTube and have a separate app which shows a YouTube-like view of only tweets with videos on them. Like a projection of that content, from the same platform.

Or alternatively you can see it as merely a "videos tab" in a single "mega-app", but this distinction is not quite substantial on a higher level, only about the logistics of marketing the app and maintaining it.

As for there being zero building happening... of course. He's trying to stop bleeding cash for now. I'm not suggesting he's working on this NOW.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 4 ans·discuss
His everything app idea is similar to WhatsApp yes, but he's had this idea from way back, when he got the X domain. The thing I'm describing is a long term vision, you need to first be profitable with the current platform before you start that.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 4 ans·discuss
I'll be brief so you hopefully see my point:

1. A general purpose computing platform is an everything app. 2. Cloud platforms and their APIs are a significant step towards moving higher-level in development platforms compared to, say, compiling a raw binary and running it on Linux. 3. Keep moving in that direction.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 4 ans·discuss
Let's imagine Google Cloud, AWS, Azure are resp. Google's / Amazon's / Microsoft's everything apps. They are managing to handle the regulatory weight of supporting applications of all kinds of nature, and if you rethink Twitter as a platform you can do the same as well.

Many things are possible, and the Twitter app today may even continue to work as-is. But underneath it will be able to power more apps and more use cases, all tied under a common cohesive set of interactive primitives, much higher level than what cloud applications today support. This means less to reinvent, less to rediscover, and easier more natural integration between apps, services and components.

It'd be a lot of work, definitely not a 2-3 month project. So you'd need also a survival strategy that keeps Twitter 1.0 working and profitable.
BulgarianIdiot
·il y a 4 ans·discuss
Haha, funny response, but I did say the details matter ;-)

I may be projecting my own ideas onto "everything". When Elon took over Twitter, I was inspired by his idea, and combined with concepts from some projects I'm working on, over two weeks or so, in my free time I wrote like 50+ pages of notes on what "Twitter 2.0" might be.

Is Elon's idea anything close to so comprehensive, I don't know. We only know he wanted payments in it, but this is barely scratching the surface of what Twitter could be.

Twitter's timeline of messages could be seen as a communication platform, computation platform, verified facts registry and so on. The rabbit hole is deep if you let your fantasy run wild.

Alas... instead we have this today.