• 0 Posts
  • 97 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2023

help-circle


  • You absolutely can’t use LLMs for anything big unless you learn to code.

    Think of an LLM as a particularly shit builder. You give them a small job and maybe 70% of the time they’ll give you something that works. But it’s often not up to spec, so even if it kinda works you’ll have to tell them to correct it or fix it yourself.

    The bigger the job is and the more complex the more ways they have to fuck it up. This means in order to use them, you have to break the problem down into small sub tasks, and check that the code is good enough for each one.

    Can they be useful? Sometimes yes, it’s quicker to have an AI write code than for you to do it yourself, and if you want something very standard it will probably get it right or almost right.

    But you can’t just say ‘write me an app’ and expect it to be useable.



  • It being undemocratic is actually pretty important for the system to work.

    Because only the house of commons is elected they have legitimacy and the house of lords knows that while they can resist some dumb crap, they do ultimately have to accept the decisions made there.

    If you have two elected houses you end up like the US with the senate blocking everything the house of representative does.

    A more representative second house with less rich people and politicial cronies would be nice though.















  • The most compelling thing about it is the fact that final link says that there’s problems with the earlier models you also linked to.

    A critical constraint on solar system formation is the high 26Al/27Al abundance ratio of 5 ×10−5 at the time of formation, which was about 17 times higher than the average Galactic ratio, while the 60Fe/56Fe value was about 2×10−8, lower than the Galactic value. This challenges the assumption that a nearby supernova was responsible for the injection of these short-lived radionuclides into the early solar system.

    They go on to explain a workaround, but if you’d even glanced at the abstract you wouldn’t have included the first two papers because the third one is arguing that the previous models are not supported by the evidence.