YourNetworkIsHaunted

I would not have pronounced that as Artifact is all I'm saying. Not nearly as apt given that the actual evidence of this project seems to have vanished in exchange for saving the grifters some money.

Rat fucked is still an apt name, to be sure.

Not gonna lie got a bit jump scared by woke Peter Thiel here. Of course I'm pretty sure his actual solution involves giving young people houses confiscated from those perfidious brown people of one stripe or another. The problem can't be an inherent injustice in a system that allows for both Peters Thiel and (insert your favorite broke person here) to exist in the same market.

I will never forget a conversation in High School where our resident young conservative sneered about how "sure $Welfare_Program sound nice, but you'll be paying for it with your taxes" and we all responded with some variant of "I mean, yeah? That's how that works, isn't it?"

"The first time I ever suffered offline consequences for a social media post"- Hey Gang, I think I found the problem!

The AI bubble has more than enough money sloshing around that I'm bracing for some more significant knock-on effects from the pop. Tech as a sector has been on some level supporting the rest of the economy in some areas, it seems, and a big employment downturn there could have enough impacts on aggregate demand to cause a recession.

Please note I am not an economist etc. etc please trust basically anyone who contradicts this analysis to know more than me.

I think everyone has a deep-seated fear of both slander lawsuits and more importantly of being the guy who called the Internet a passing fad in 1989 or whenever it was. Which seems like a strange attitude to take on to me. Isn't being quoted for generations some element of the point? If you make a strong claim and are correct then you might be a genius and spare people a lot of harm. If you're wrong maybe some people miss out on an opportunity but you become a legend.

Remember the ~two weeks when Sabine was a vaguely respectable science communicator? That was wild.

Yeah. The whole Gel-Mann effect always feels overstated to me. Similar to the "falsus in unus" doctrine Crichton mentions in his blog, the actual consensus appears to be that actually context does matter. Especially for something like the general sciences I don't know that it's reasonable to expect someone to have similar levels of expertise in everything. To be sure the kinds of errors people make matter; it looks like this is a case of insufficient skepticism and fact checking, so Hank is more credulous than I had thought. That's not the same as everything he's put out being nonsense, though.

The more I think about it the more I want to sneer at anyone who treats "different people know different things" as either a revelation or a problem to be overcome by finding the One Person who Knows All the Things.

Just gonna go ahead and make sure I fact check any scishow or crash course that the kid gets into a bit more aggressively now.

I mean, it feels like there's definitely something in the concept of a Where Is Everybody style of episode where Mark has to navigate a world where dead internet theory has hit the real world and all around him are bots badly imitating workers trying to serve bots badly imitating customers in order to please bots badly imitating managers so that bots badly imitating cops don't drag them to robot jail

ChatGPT finally achieved profitability due to unintended money laundering at unprecedented scale.

It really aggressively tries to match it up to something with similar keywords and structure, which is kind of interesting in its own right. It pattern-matched every variant I could come up with for "when all you have is..." for example.

Honestly it's kind of an interesting question and limitation for this kind of LLM. How should you respond when someone asks about an idiom neither of you know? The answer is really contextual. Sometimes it's better to try and help them piece together what it means, other times it's more important to acknowledge that this isn't actually a common expression or to try and provide accurate sourcing. The LLM, of course, has none of that context and because the patterns it replicates don't allow expressions of uncertainty or digressions it can't actually do both.