Kostenlos. Werbefrei. Menschlich. Dein Abnehmforum.
P
@technicaladept @raineer @drahardja @skyfire747 @nomenloony @blogdiva
No, a duplicate explanation of what the code is doing is not what comments are for.
Comments are more for "why" one method or choice than another, sometimes "why not", than "what".
Except doc comments, which are closer to spec i.e. "what". The code itself is "how", and it doesn't necessarily come via a verbal description in natural language.
@raineer @drahardja @skyfire747 @nomenloony @blogdiva
Domain expert here: they aren't extremely effective for me in my field (programming) because to tell an LLM precisely enough what to do, I'd have to use a verbose English description, and I've already constructed the solution in my head in a more structural form that isn't words. Turning it back into words to tell an LLM what code to generate is a step backwards.
This is an essential failure mode of slop text: it's only recombining probable things that might come next, and it's never trying to *say a specific thing* - there's no model of the thing the text is *about*.
So there's no process by which the LLM can express that thing elegantly or tell if it has been expressed at all.
@jhooper @jonoleth @edgeofeurope @futurebird
Why do you think you could choose to be like that? What would make you do such a thing? Does entertaining the idea of pointless cruelty as an option make you more or less monstrous?
Saying "I would never do that" isn't supposed to be wishful thinking about how nice a person you are, it's supposed to be a foundational moral choice. It's not like the weather or something.
@jonoleth @edgeofeurope @futurebird
That's not what I said tho. The trouble with saying "they are like us" instead of "they act like us socially to get what they want" or "any of us could be like that" instead of "you can tell who is like that by what they support" is it makes monsters harder to spot; it denies they even really exist (or gives them space to hide behind that phrasing).
And people being quick to dismiss accusations is not, in fact, a reason to avoid accurate accusations.
I've heard the cliche before, I understand it, I just reject it.
You're better than someone who wants to deport a child, or I don't know what to tell you. People who wouldn't are better than people who would.
Did something in our society make them that way? Maybe. Are the people who don't want to deport small children responsible for the ones who do, somehow? Absolutely fucking not.
They are monsters of each other's making, perhaps, not ours.
Or maybe we keep calling them monsters, because that's what they are. We *couldn't* be them, we *wouldn't* try to have a pre-school child deported. We shouldn't tolerate their poison amongst us.
We just have to recalibrate our intuition about how many monsters there are, is all. Just because they do normal jobs and wear a normal face doesn't mean they are us.
He's a completely hollowed out person. Chasing all the wrong things, desperately trying to buy his best life, but completely unable to understand what a good life even is.
If they *were* just a death cult that would also be true.
Not saying it's that simple, but if someone said "Look out, that death cult is coming to get us" I don't think "But they only want to kill people like us, not themselves" would be responsive to the situation. Which is why I think *from outside the cult* there's no important terminological distinction.
If they could be reasoned with, you could apply reason to their goals as they perceive them, yes.
They're aligned with all the other anti-human movements on the right (anti immigration, forced birth, fuck everything to fulfil the prophesies in Revelations, cops do murders whenever they like, healthcare for profit, prisons for profit) so death cult is a convenient shorthand.
Whenever a new policy question comes up that hasn't been assigned to Woke or MAGA yet, MAGA will pick the option with more death a statistically significant amount of the time.
@Anomnomnomaly @mhkohne @da_667 @mttaggart
Agentic AI is just generative AI generating and then executing API calls to do things with consequences. So, no thanks. I won't be giving an "agentic AI" my credit card.
@Crystal_Fish_Caves @heidilifeldman
It won't stop them, but it'll be read into evidence at Bovino's trial.
@Tattie @EF @LaChasseuse
100% this.
Yeah, for example Tory/UKIP politicians promising leaving the EU would result in things that were legally, practically and even logically impossible was a big part of the Brexit catastrophe, and the civil service weren't forcing them to do that. They were screaming into a pillow because they aren't allowed to oppose government policy politically no matter how stupid and doomed it is.
@EF @LaChasseuse
I know people who work in the civil service, and all I can say is that is not what's happening as far as they can tell.
But even if it was, instead of Labour you could vote for a party with progressive policy goals, who would have the civil service implement them, just as previous governments have done with disastrously regressive policies.
I don't think anyone praising this video is planning to vote Labour.
The civil service aren't puppet-masters, they're administrators and workers who try to implement whatever policy, good or bad, the government dictates. They will advise about difficulties, but they are definitely not calling the shots; their advice is frequently ignored.
You can choose politicians who aren't puppets of the rich; that's the point of voting. Most people may not see that choice clearly, but that's the point of campaigning. Hence the video.
@mina
I assume their head is small enough for the cells to get enough food and oxygen by diffusion without any kind of circulatory system but it's still astonishing.
@elplatt @futurebird @wakame
Yeah it only means an inconsistency was detected while trying to interpret/compile line 32, not that the mistake as a human would identify it is on line 32.