blakestacey

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (5 children)

The New Yorker gamely tries to find some merit, any at all in the writings of Dimes Square darling Honor Levy. For example:

In the story “Little Lock,” which portrays the emotional toll of having to always make these calculations, the narrator introduces herself as a “brat” and confesses that she can’t resist spilling her secrets, which she defines as “my most shameful thoughts,” and also as “sacred and special.”

I'm really scraping the bottom of the barrel for extremely online ways to express the dull thud of banality here. "So profound, very wow"? "You mean it's all shit? —Always has been."

She mixes provocation with needy propitiation

Right-click thesaurus to the rescue!

But the narrator’s shameful thoughts, which are supposed to set her apart, feel painfully ordinary. The story, like many of Levy’s stories, is too hermetically sealed in its own self-absorption to understand when it is expressing a universal experience. Elsewhere, the book’s solipsism renders it unintelligible, overly delighted by the music of its own style—the drama of its own specialness—and unable to provide needed context.

So, it's bad. Are you incapable of admitting when something is just bad?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I often use prompts

Well, there's your problem

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago (2 children)

and hot young singles in your area have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell

on the blockchain

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So many techbros have decided to scrape the fediverse that they all blur together now... I was able to dig up this:

"I hear I’m supposed to experiment with tech not people, and must not use data for unintended purposes without explicit consent. That all sounds great. But what does it mean?" He whined.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 months ago (27 children)

When you don’t have anything new, use brute force. Just as GPT-4 was eight instances of GPT-3 in a trenchcoat, o1 is GPT-4o, but running each query multiple times and evaluating the results. o1 even says “Thought for [number] seconds” so you can be impressed how hard it’s “thinking.”.

This “thinking” costs money. o1 increases accuracy by taking much longer for everything, so it costs developers three to four times as much per token as GPT-4o.

Because the industry wasn't doing enough climate damage already.... Let's quadruple the carbon we shit into the air!

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I have to admit that I wasn't expecting LinkedIn to become a wretched hive of "quantum" bullshit, but hey, here we are.

Tangentially: Schrödinger is a one-man argument for not naming ideas after people.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago

(smashes imaginary intercom button) "Who is this 'some guy'? Find him and find out what he knows!!"

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Happy belated birthday!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (13 children)

Elon Musk in the replies:

Have you read Asimov’s Foundation books?

They pose an interesting question: if you knew a dark age was coming, what actions would you take to preserve knowledge and minimize the length of the dark age?

For humanity, a city on Mars. Terminus.

Isaac Asimov:

I'm a New Deal Democrat who believes in soaking the rich, even when I'm the rich.

(From a 1968 letter quoted in Yours, Isaac Asimov.)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (14 children)

Lex Fridman: "I'm going to do a deep dive on Ancient Rome. Turns out it was a land of contrasts"

I'm doing a podcast episode on the Roman Empire.

It's a deep dive into military conquest, technology, politics, economics, religion... from its rise to its collapse (n the west & the east).

History really does put everything in perspective.

(xcancel)

view more: ‹ prev next ›