tkluck · HackerTrans

9 miesięcy temudiscuss

I clicked the link expecting a discussion of what would cause a Python interpreter to crash, but found only a generic list of low level problems for any piece of software, and the statement that the headline was an interview question at YouTube ten years ago.

tkluck

12 miesięcy temudiscuss

You're not contradicting the post you're replying to; you're describing common workarounds to approximate exactly-once semantics using at-least-once semantics on the message queue combined with external storage on the reader side.

tkluck

w zeszłym rokudiscuss

Even under the AI-maximalist assumption that human workers and LLMs are going to be interchangeable, I'm having a hard time seeing the logic.

LLMs are not going to go on parental leave; have various protected statuses; have worker protection, visa issues or a compensation structure. In other words, there's no synergy at all from having them be managed in the same way as actual human resources. (And I'm sorry for using the term human resources unironically -- that just follows from the AI maximalist assumption.)

There's maybe some synergy in workforce planning, but if HR was doing that then there's already something broken in the business. HR is supposed to contribute legal expertise first, cultural and team dynamics expertise second, and process expertise not at all.

tkluck

w zeszłym rokudiscuss

It's clear from the quoted paragraph that by "error rate" they actually meant "false denial rate". That's also the words I used in the comment you are replying to.

Did you comment because you take issue with misuse of the term error rate, or because you think that correct approvals make up for incorrect denials, and that therefore overall error rate is a useful metric?

tkluck

w zeszłym rokudiscuss

Your scientific take is useful in the case where selection bias is unavoidable and needs to be corrected for.

This case is not like that; if the insurance agency wants to dispute the 90% false denial rate, it would be trivial for them to take a random sample of _all_ cases, go through the appeal process for those, and publish the resulting number without selection bias.

As long as that doesn't happen, the most logical conclusion for us outside observers is: the number is probably not so much lower than 90% that it makes a difference.

tkluck

2 lata temudiscuss

Gotcha, I see. You're not wrong that a combination of scientific illiteracy and political orthodoxy can give terrible outcomes. So some default skepticism is quite wise.

If you want to understand the effect of the trace gases from first principles, you can read more about it under "Effective temperature of the Earth" at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan%E2%80%93Boltzmann_law . It also links to the Wikipedia page about the greenhouse effect, which you'll appreciate more after reading about the Stefan Boltzmann law first.

tkluck

2 lata temudiscuss

Are you making the claim that small numbers are always irrelevant? In that case it's worth reading up on the greenhouse effect. It's unfortunately very true that water vapour and CO2 have an outsize effect on the planet's heat balance.

You mix that claim with an implication about people who don't know that number off the top of their heads, but: - work on sustainability for feelgood - are independently wealthy otherwise.

I don't understand exactly what you're implying but it doesn't seem very generalizable. Society can face arbitrarily complicated threats, to counter which we can create incentives even for those who don't know the details.

How to get political agreement on the important threats and the best (effective / fair / ...) incentives is an open problem.

tkluck

2 lata temudiscuss

Yes. It's the canonical (and, I think, original) example of a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confusopoly .

tkluck

2 lata temudiscuss

It's the opposite in democratic countries such as France: while every other person or entity is free to do everything except what's explicitly regulated, the government only has those powers that are explicitly granted to them by laws and regulations.

The comment you replied to was referring to the EU regulating major tech powers through e.g. GDPR and DSA.

comments