I like Rust, but if you don't like programming in C, you won't like programming in Rust.

If you have fun programming in Rust, you will have fun programming in C.

"Fun" is something manager types tell you when they are trying to convince you to do something. If something is fun, you don't need to tell people. It's also what you tell toddlers.

Selfdriving cars cannot drive to every location, they can only drive to somewhere that has been mapped. So they might actually be incapable of doing this.

This is fuzzy thinking, "Shakespearean text" is not the same as "text of Shakespeare."

LLMs only produce text within the parameters they were built. If it was not built to produce a text of Shakespeare, then it won't.

A simple heuristic to understand this is to think of Elizabot. An Elizabot can produce meaningful English text, and has even passed a Turing test. But it will never produce a work of Shakespeare, no matter how long you let it run. It's outside of its parameters. If you don't understand how an Elizabot works, then this example is too much for you.

A random number generator can generate anything.

A non-random generator cannot. LLMs are not random generators. To generate the entire works of Shakespeare, they would need to retain the entire works of Shakespeare in their memory (weights).

Security isn't something that can be tacked on afterwards, otherwise Microsoft Windows wouldn't have vulnerabilities.

Security has to be a main design requirement from the beginning. If your software engineers don't know how to write secure code, then they won't write secure code.

Maybe.

I've never seen an advertisement for meat, and I've bought meat online. So maybe.

Your idea is that America only has an airforce and can't do anything other than bombing?

I don't know where you get this idea, did you stop reading the news? Did you see that they conquered Venezuela in three hours?

The current task for the US military is to open the straits of Hormuz. How much of a ground force will be necessary (if any) is unclear, but we will see. Incidentally America is the only military in the world that can currently do large scale combined arms operations.

The US military won the Iraq war easily. The problems came when brain-dead politicians made bureaucratic decisions that were completely disconnected from reality, as dramatized by Matt Daemon. If America fails in Iran, it will be for the same reason. Given Trump's tenuous connection to reality, that's a real risk.

Five years ago when I bought a car in America the manual was roughly $1000 cheaper than the automatic.

That is believable. A sole developer at a law firm will have random tasks (like, "find out what is in this dbDOS PRO database we found during discovery"). As such, a lot of your time is spent figuring out how to do things that will only have to be done once. Traditionally, you would have spent time in search engines or StackOverflow trying to figure it out. Now AI is acting as a type of advanced search engine for you.

So your work is like the ideal use case for AI.

That's not really true. Science is a tool for testing hypotheses. It doesn't really care where the hypothesis comes from. In this case, the hypothesis is that the human brain can be perfectly simulated by a Turing Machine, which is a reasonable hypothesis.

If they just accepted that as true, it would be unscientific. But if they actually test their hypothesis, it's not unscientific.

At the time when he said that, the number was closer to 90% than to half.

Now it's easier to target, and easier to figure out which advertising is wasted.

A random generator will eventually create the works of Shakespeare.

A current LLM will never create the works of Shakespeare.

wtf I had never heard of Zizians, they claim to be rationalists but seem completely insane.

NASA already has this. No need to wait 10 days.

Welp, I can assure you that when I question authority, I am not doing it to gain my own power. I am anarchist to the core.