Paul Cantrell
Years ago, somebody online described a legally ignorant post I’d made about a matter of law as a fractal of wrongness: the whole conclusion was wrong, but also every part of it was wrong. The wrongness had more wrongness inside it.
They were correct. When I read their post, I realized I'd been talking out of my ass.
But man oh man, even at my most ignorant and arrogant, I’ve got nothing on this Andreessen guy. Pheweeee.
Paul Cantrell
@jardo
Yeah. The way it defies criticism is a kind of genius in itself, I suppose? Brings to mind the quote often attributed to Pauli: “That is not only not right, it is not even wrong.”
Jared Norman
@inthehands You picked up on exactly why I didn’t comment on any specific part of it.
Paul Cantrell
Sitting here trying to make a satire transposing Andreesen’s dumbassery into a nontechnica realm, and this is the best I’ve managed:
“A world in which trees are all destroyed by squirrels, who then themselves die out — logically, necessarily — is a world in which nut production goes through the roof, absent the squirrels to eat them. Because zero divided by zero is infinity, we then live in an infinite forest, beyond all imagining.”
Joe Groff
@inthehands whenever I see someone post that guys posts I can only think about jwz’s anecdotes about him leaving the Netscape bathrooms uninhabitable every time he used them, and how thats what my timeline feels like after seeing his posts
Paul Cantrell
@joe
That is spot on. And sorry to have once again brought him to your TL.
Paul Cantrell
Last thought, and then I swear I'll kick this numnut out of my head and get back to the better things I was doing:
Somebody here made the astute observation that people keep following this pattern where they try an LLM and decide that it’s terrible for their •own• area of expertise, but is amazing for something they’re completely ignorant about.
This may help explain why all these tech olibros think AI is amazing at absolutely everything.
Michael Wyman
@inthehands A Thneed’s a Fine Something that ALL people need.
Paul Cantrell
@mwyman
That book is a frigging masterpiece, and the longer I watch the world, the more it impresses me.
Paul Cantrell
@chargrille
[flamboyant boy]
Erin Conroy
@inthehands OMG Paul. 💯 💥
Paul Cantrell
@estelle
The key here is the difference between “can” and “will.”
estelle
@inthehands nevertheless, i've always maintained that the fact that a highly technological society can be built upon the labor of a small number of human beings shows that, somehow, society can probably figure out how to pay them with all that automation,
estelle
@inthehands seeking prior art might have prevented a lot of this sort of thinking
sarah taber was a very good follow when you wanted to know all the ways that agriculture (including automated agriculture) could go horribly wrong,
either due to vastly underestimating the needed scale, or underestimating the problem of How Not to Spend 90% of the Robot's Lifespan Being Repaired
(it turns out that typical field conditions are perfect for killing even "waterproof" robots)
Paul Cantrell
@estelle
Yup
estelle
@inthehands i would suggest not giving the keys to that decision, then, to the sorts of people who think a mainframe-based large language model will harvest crops for them, and have put zero effort into trying to invalidate their own assumptions
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.