Sasha

I'm getting replies in my inbox but I can't view post comments lol, thankyou!

I'm not poor but most of my fun stuff is free, hanging out at parks (picnics with friends or just relaxing with a book or something), walking/cycling trails, free or pay as you feel shows and weekly food not bombs community dinners.

Nothing wrong with a 1 bedroom apartment tbh, and I don't understand why not living in a house means you can't buy and own things lol. I've got loads of stuff I can do here if I don't want to go out, I've even got plenty of private outdoor space. If I didn't have so much stuff keeping me busy I could very easily stay in my apartment for weeks at a time, only really leaving to get groceries, I've never gone mad from it.

Tbh I find this life is significantly cheaper given I don't have as much maintenance as a house, and I don't need to pay the absurdly high costs associated with a car.

Edit: looks like jerboa broke for me so I've got no clue if this posted or what anyone else is saying lol

We're against hierarchy, not organising.

I was going to say this, it's how I found my local anarcho-federation

I meant they're specifically not going for that though. The experiment isn't about improving the environment itself, it's about improving the LLM. Otherwise they'd have spent the paper evaluating the effects of different environments and not different LLMs.

I'm pretty sure they touch on those points in the paper, they knew they were overloading it and were looking at how it handled that in particular. My understanding is that they're testing failure modes to try and probe the inner workings to some degree; they discuss the impact of filling up the context in the abstract, mention it's designed to stress test and are particularly interested in memory limits, so I'm pretty sure they've deliberately chosen to not cater to an LLMs ideal conditions. It's not really a real world use case of LLMs running a business (even if that's the framing given initially), it's not just a test to demonstrate capabilities, it's an experiment meant to break them in a simulated environment. The last line of the abstract kind highlights this, they're hoping to find flaws to improve the models generally.

Either way, I just meant to point out that they can absolutely just output junk as a failure mode.

LLMs can degrade by giving "wrong" answers, but not because of network congestion ofc.

That paper is fucking hilarious, but the tl;dr is that when asked to manage a vending machine business for an extended period of time, they eventually go completely insane. Some have an existential crisis, some call the whole thing a conspiracy and call the FBI, etc. it's amazing how trash they are.

I'm glad Kirk is gone, I'll never not be happy about that, I think it's objectively good. But I think it's still important to recognise that it's very shitty that he did end up a miserable little cunt who was better off dead.

Mostly though, I'm just worried about how celebrating death makes it seem like a virtue we'd want or accept in a new society. Revolution at a necessary cost, don't get me wrong, but we shouldn't celebrate the cost itself. I think it's totally okay to celebrate the end result, "the problem of Charlie Kirk is now solved" or something lol, but the method was both objectively awful and necessary.

Murder is a tool as all violence is, but we should it treat as what it is: a horrible one we're forced to use to attain liberation and thus ultimately a form of violence inflicted upon us. After a revolution, I think it's best left behind in this shitty fucking world we all hate.

Regardless, get fucked Kirk, good riddance and rest in piss you slimey little cunt.

Working for banks fucking sucks. I'm currently quiet quitting as hard as I can while I get my resume up to scratch, I'll be jumping ship asap.

And you'll lock the war criminal and murderer up too, right?

Ahaha, that's very true Scandinavia is a mysterious place.

Yeah the comment on Cleopatra is just laughable on the face of it haha, I didn't even think it was worth addressing.

Glad you're stepping away there's no point getting worked up on this. I normally wouldn't have engaged to this degree myself, but I found that particular rebuttal to Tacitus to be so damn funny that I couldn't not.

I suspect they're genuine, I feel I've been this person in the past. Sometimes it's hard to learn to reevaluate and be wrong about things, and religion is a pretty stigmatising issue that can leave you with a lot of unresolved and misguided anger. It's unfortunate, but human.

The claim about Tacitus not writing on Jesus comes from one "source" in the pop culture section. That source is a fictional character in a novel (one who's obviously portrayed as highly biased on this issue, ironically...) it gets even more embarassing when you look up what that novel is about...

There's also this which mentions that his writings on Jesus are pretty much agreed to be authentic. The Roman empire was indeed very good at keeping records, that's why Tacitus is considered such a reliable source...

You're making a lot of claims about the motivations of people, with no actual evidence to show for it, and using that to dismiss them as sources. This is painfully ironic. Not everything is a Catholic conspiracy, it's okay for the world to be nuanced.