Architeuthis

joined 2 years ago
[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Reminds me of an SMBC comic that had a setup along the same lines, that if male birth order correlates with homosexuality and family size trends being what they are, the past must have been considerably gayer on average.

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 6 points 1 week ago

No idea where they would land on what to mock and what to take seriously from this whole mess.

Don't know what they're up to these days but last time I checked I had them pegged as enlightened centrists whose style of satire is having strong beliefs about stuff is cringe more than it is ever having to say anything of even accidental substance about said things.

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 6 points 1 week ago

The first prompt programming libraries start to develop, along with the first bureaucracies.

I went three layers deep in his references and his references' references to find out what the hell prompt programming is supposed to be, ended up in a gwern footnote:

It's the ideologized version of You're Prompting It Wrong. Which I suspected but doubted, because why would they pretend that LLMs being finicky and undependable unless you luck into very particular ways of asking for very specific things is a sign that they're doing well.gwern wrote:

I like “prompt programming” as a description of writing GPT-3 prompts because ‘prompt’ (like ‘dynamic programming’) has almost purely positive connotations; it indicates that iteration is fast as the meta-learning avoids the need for training so you get feedback in seconds; it reminds us that GPT-3 is a “weird machine” which we have to have “mechanical sympathy” to understand effective use of (eg. how BPEs distort its understanding of text and how it is always trying to roleplay as random Internet people); implies that prompts are programs which need to be developed, tested, version-controlled, and which can be buggy & slow like any other programs, capable of great improvement (and of being hacked); that it’s an art you have to learn how to do and can do well or poorly; and cautions us against thoughtless essentializing of GPT-3 (any output is the joint outcome of the prompt, sampling processes, models, and human interpretation of said outputs).

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 4 points 1 week ago

They look like the evil twins of the Penny Arcade writers.

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 10 points 1 week ago (11 children)

It is with great regret that I must inform you that all this comes with a three-hour podcast featuring Scoot in the flesh: 2027 Intelligence Explosion: Month-by-Month Model — Scott Alexander & Daniel Kokotajlo

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That was a good one. Also, was he the first to break the coreweave situation? Not a bad journalistic get if that's the case.

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 8 points 2 weeks ago

Imagine insecure smart people yes-anding each other into believing siskind and yud are profound thinkers.

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Wish I'd found a non clunky way to work "cult incubator" into that.

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It's pick-me objectivism, only more overtly culty the closer you are to it irl. Imagine scientology if it was organized around AI doomerism and naive utilitarianism while posing as a get-smart-quick scheme.

It's main function (besides getting the early adopters laid) is to provide court philosophers for the technofeudalist billionaire class, while grooming talented young techies into a wide variety of extremist thought both old and new, mostly by fostering contempt of established epistemological authority in the same way Qanons insist people do their own research, i.e. as a euphemism for only paying attention to ingroup approved influencers.

It seems to have both a sexual harassment and a suicide problem, with a lot of irresponsible scientific racism and drug abuse in the mix.

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 4 points 2 weeks ago

Intelligence^2^ didn't seem half bad when Robert Anton Wilson was the one talking about it way back when, in retrospect all the libertarianism was a real time bomb.

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

SMBC using the ratsphere as comics fodder, part the manyeth:

transcriptionRetrofuturistic Looking Ghost: SCROOOOOGE! I am the ghost of christmas extreme future! Why! Why did you not find a way to indicate to humans 400 generation from now where toxic waste was storrrrrrrred! Look how Tiny Tim's cyborg descendant has to make costrly RNA repaaaaaaairs!

Byline: The Longtermist version of A Christmas Carol is way better.

bonus

spoiler transcription Scrooge: I tried, but no, no, I just don't give a shit. :::

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago

hand-writing your original manuscript

The revenge of That One Teacher who always rode you for having terrible handwriting.

 

original is here, but you aren't missing any context, that's the twit.

I could go on and on about the failings of Shakespear... but really I shouldn't need to: the Bayesian priors are pretty damning. About half the people born since 1600 have been born in the past 100 years, but it gets much worse that that. When Shakespear wrote almost all Europeans were busy farming, and very few people attended university; few people were even literate -- probably as low as ten million people. By contrast there are now upwards of a billion literate people in the Western sphere. What are the odds that the greatest writer would have been born in 1564? The Bayesian priors aren't very favorable.

edited to add this seems to be an excerpt from the fawning book the big short/moneyball guy wrote about him that was recently released.

view more: ‹ prev next ›