Regarding the achievements, there are many that only unlock if you are playing a certain difficulty or ruleset. It’s not difficult to disable achievements while cheat codes are active. Plus people who are cheating with achievements (or high scores) often just fake it entirely and just send steam a fake score or achievement unlock, or use 3rd party tools/mods to do the cheating so the game can’t even filter cheating vs legit achievements.

And this reminded me of a parallel to cheats offered by paradox games: custom rules. With CKII, you can create custom rulers without any limits. It’ll say “don’t go above this score if you want achievements, otherwise do what you want”. You can even replace every single ruler in the game with basically mortal gods before you start and switch between them at will if you don’t care about achievements, or replace everyone else with sickly imbeciles and dominate them all until they start dying off and getting replaced with normal characters.

And mods are another direction customization and replayability were taken vs using cheat codes.

Yeah, personally, I’ve noticed that I notice and appreciate very high quality streams when they are there but don’t notice lower quality ones in a bad way (where “lower quality” is still like 1080p, 720p is more noticeable).

Like 4k looks great but 1080p still looks normal.

Maybe they’ll try to do that for a president musk.

What an entitled and dumb twat. I guess he didn’t think it through that the guy maintaining it now doesn’t have some magical ability to tell who would be a good new owner and “handing over the mainline” to any one person could screw people more than any AI changes because that new person might be malicious or neglectful.

Forks need to earn trust and it’s best that that step isn’t skipped by some inheritance. Not that there even is any obligation to hand it off no matter how many people rely on it or complain.

And the comparison with ms or Google was dumb because I didn’t expect them to do it the way I wanted and stopped using what I could to get away from where they were going and any expectation that they hand over their projects to someone else would be ridiculous (and Google open source projects have been forked).

Have you mentioned yet that anyone can do that second one by making their own fork? And that no one is required to give a fuck about how they think it should be done?

Or just do it like reddit did, where you can delete your post content and remove your username from it, but the thread and comments remain.

Though with how the fediverse works, it’s possible to spin up a custom instance that highlights deleted content instead of deleting it, meaning the attempt to get rid of it can be what brings it more attention if anyone has decided to do it. Just like with vote identities, they aren’t anonymous and there are instances/sites that just show who voted for what.

I’m still undecided about their own text (deleting comments or post text disrupts the conversation but there’s valid reasons), but I don’t think the OP of a thread should have any control over the existence of that full comment thread.

Frankly, I don’t think users should have that power.

It’s more about the nature of a purge. If you were trying to put the best people for the roles in those roles prior to a purge, then a purge is going to leave you with worse people for the jobs, or at the very least, less experienced people doing those jobs.

It might have been sexism behind the reason women dominated those roles before the purge, but it’s normal for quality to drop after a political purge.

Same thing happened with the Nazis after Hitler did some rounds of purges in the Wermacht upper echelon after that assassination attempt with the bomb that injured him and discovering the plot for a military coup in its background. The purges really didn’t help their war efforts when they were already struggling.

Somewhere between 50 and 60, I think.

So it only counts if the British agree to it?

Though changing content goes both ways. Just this past week I was looking at the new releases on Netflix and saw they had added a new season of Harley Quinn and checked the info to see if it was the 3rd like I remembered and it seems that they simultaneously removed the earlier seasons.

And in general, I think there have been more good things lost than added, not to mention the way Netflix writes shows for people who aren’t paying attention is annoying as someone who does. Fuck off with repeating all the relevant information every single time it comes up.

Might be because hotels are saying there aren’t bookings, making it easier to see that demand isn’t involved in setting the prices.

Yeah, reinventing the wheel can be fun.

You can train it on all the source code, meta data for that source code, and documentation you want but it will never understand programming. It’s a text predictor that was trained on both sides of a bunch of debates. Contradictions mean nothing to it, but it usually only predicts what one side of the debate will say to champion its side, which means it will use confident and absolute language to “sell” whatever side of the debate it looks like the previous tokens are headed towards.

It is impressive what it can output sometimes and it makes a decent debate/exploration partner, but it will always have a chance at predicting a useless series of tokens or contradicting the previous thing it just said because a) its training data only trains it to predict tokens from statistics, and b) its training data includes some of those contradictions directly.

I have lost count of the times I’ve been “thinking out loud” about something with an LLM and realize something about what I’m thinking about that contradicts what it is currently saying, then I’ll add my new perspective and it agrees entirely, despite the contradiction. Sometimes it tries to resolve the contradiction, sometimes it just abandons what it said previously entirely, sometimes it adds more to the perspective that I hadn’t considered.

That’s fine for just shooting the shit about some random topic but horrible for a tool intended to provide expertise and reliability, when the response matters because it feeds into something else and you want to automate it. Should a tool just inject “are you sure?” after each response? What if it makes it second guess something that was correct? What if it’s one of those debates and it will endlessly switch sides when it faces any opposition? That’s a waste of resources and time.

Funny thing is I’m expecting this to eventually go back to scripting for automation. An LLM has a higher chance of outputting a script that does what you want (depending on the task) while you hold its hand than it does of consistently giving the correct output when it is thrown into an automated system directly. But you get “goodish” results much quicker just trying putting the LLMs everywhere, even if there’s some selection bias on the results (“didn’t work, didn’t work, oh it worked, great!”).

For someone fluent in all involved languages, sure.

But from the sounds of it, OP’s company outsources the translation but doesn’t fully trust the output they get back. They’re back to square one for verifying it, because if they knew both languages enough to verify, they could do the translations themselves.

The problem AI is trying to solve is “how do I access a skill I don’t have cheaply?” It’s only because it’s bad at that problem that it has shifted to “how can we use AI to get more production out of the skilled workers we still need to babysit the AI that is unreliable at everything?”

I’m sure you could involve a torch in there somehow to raise the stakes even more. Grilled Cheese Flamble has a certain ring to it.

It’s kinda like the push to return to office. It was driven by corps having invested in the “can’t fail (ignoring the last previous crash)” real estate market and buying their offices. If everyone suddenly works from home instead of in the office, then those investments go bad because demand for office space is way down. So they tell people to go back to the office, hoping to return to that “every business needs offices!” status quo and save their investments. Though the demand is false (especially combined with layoffs), so it won’t necessarily cause any new corp to want that office space. If they don’t have the sunk cost, then they don’t need to accept the rest of the fallacy.

With AI, it’s the same but just replace building investment with R&D as well as data centre investment. A lot of the companies really pushing AI are the ones that will profit from people going along with that. They really want to build a dependence amongst users as well as a good reputation for execs so they can get a return on the investment. Then there’s also the True Believers (who think LLMs are brilliant AIs that can solve anything if given the right prompts) and the FOMOs (who don’t know much about it but see the world moving towards it and don’t want to miss it because if it was a real AI, missing it could be a massive mistake). There’s also some people who just don’t have various skills and want the AI agents to fill those gaps (and probably don’t have a very good idea about what the LLMs are actually doing in those gaps).

At this point, I think it’s a mistake to go all in on this tech. LLMs aren’t reliable, and their ability to “perform” is more about their flexibility than being well-suited for any task. They’ll go directly from saying things that seem “insightful” (they have no insight) to making the dumbest “mistake” (a mistake requires intent, which they lack, they just predict tokens). But there’s all kinds of false and true (albeit misguided IMO) demand right now and it’s still in early pricing mode (remember the intent is to make that investment money back).

Oh and there’s also China which has been making more efficient models and open sourcing some of them. If they continue to do this, there’s a decent chance those investments will never give the desired returns, at least not to those who are trying to sell tokens. Or those who depend on those selling tokens, like any hardware companies selling hardware under the assumption that it will then make the money to pay for itself (which I believe both nVidia and AMD have done).

It’s mirroring the dotcom bubble with that last bit because network cable companies started loaning the money to pay for their cables to ISPs, expecting returns that never came.

Only if it’s been trained on discussions about it.

I would love if this attitude caught on with enough people to make the marketing industry implode.

I am aware of when I have a vague familiarity with a product or brand and know that that familiarity doesn’t equal good. These days it could mean anything from best in class to absolute shit. The only thing they have in common is that a lot of money was spent on marketing.

Other than that, I need to either take a gamble or do deep research into the thing I want to do (though I’m learning that the real thing I want to look into is the result I want because I might be starting with the wrong process to get there, but after that will still be research on the process and tools to do it, followed by what materials and features are good for that).

Funny thing is that in the end, I do want advertising. Only difference is I want advertising that can be trusted when marketing is often either pushing outright lies when it thinks it can get away with it or has flipped around their message so much so that they can talk their product up without outright lying. I want a reviewer that will call garbage garbage (or even better, go into detail about why they think it is garbage) and not have to worry about whether that means some producers won’t want to send them free shit to review.