The entire game is normalize generative while collecting conversations. Whichever players achieve ecosystem lock-in during the paid phase will have the network effects needed to sustain them during the commodization phase. They will know our capabilities, our dreams, our even our secret desires. And they will amass inconceivable fortunes monetizing us to their advertisers.
I came here to say pretty much the same. It is so tiring to hear opinions like these from technically-minded people who clearly lack "better-than-average" creativity and lateral thinking skills. LLMs are garbage-in garbage-out in terms of brainstorming. If you aren't good at brainstorming without LLMs then they won't be much use. So many people are just seeing their own limits reflected back at them.
When I'm brainstorming math or cryptography or philosophy with an LLM it is only because of the connections and leaps that I introduce that leads to novel and amusing discoveries.
You have to develop successful patterns. Coaxing and condensing. Drilling into numbered lists. Asking for tables with progressively more columns and altered sorting. You have to know the spatial reasoning limits of the model. Asking for enumeration and disabling of social niceties. The number of skills needed is probably beyond most people's imaginations.
This, and that it is far more profitable for ISPs to aggregate our traffic patterns and sell them to ad companies and governments than to drive people to VPNs by raising awareness of the reasons we can't trust them.
My ideal is a starter that offers a nice blend of microservices and configures them for me just enough to get them working in easy-to-manage and organized way. Most importantly, they are all optional and easily removable.
I do this with npm scripts for "compose", "start", "stop", and "reset" for every service and tie it all together with dotenv for environment vars. Currently, I have dockerized Traefik (partially), Webpack (dev server only so far), Pocketbase, PostgreSQL, PostgREST, Swagger UI, PgTyped, and MongoDB under this and will soon also dockerize the Express-based RESTish API feature.
> I'd be happy to use a similar fullstack solution in JS/TS but afaik it doesn't exist.
If you mean, a fully TypeScript full stack solution then you might be correct. I wouldn't know because I tried Deno earlier this year and it wasn't great.
If you mean, a full stack solution that utilizes TS to for both the API and for the frontend then that is a much easier find. Vercel's Next.js provides this out-of-the-box and various other full stack starters and boilderplates exist.
I recently built one using PgTyped and typescript-rest.
If the physical world consists only of efficient causality, how can we create computational intelligence (that is, thinking computers or hard AI) that exhibits final causality from physical processes?
At some point the various efforts similar to DeepMind are going to hit this wall. Getting over it is going to require that either we use biological material (neurons, glia, etc) to bridge the gap or reproduce their extra-dimensional quantum features in hardware.
This guy completely misses the point. The excitement over Bitcoin is due part to the fact that it operates over a decentralized P2P network that exists independently from the creators.
Perhaps if one of the earlier forms of digital currency had been as altruistic in their engineering they would have seen as much enthusiasm from the public.
In other words, nobody is going to get excited about propping up the next big evil empire like PayPal. Bitcoin puts the powers of paying and being paid right where it belongs; directly with the people.
Canned response: Bitcoin is only "peer-to-peer" in the sense of the British Peerage system.
Early-comer-wins, that's the only advantage I see (for early comers). Bitcoin does not capitalize trust in people and institutions (like regular modern money system does, by the way). It is just a silly pyramid scheme reselling air, fed by hopes of those higher in the pyramid to sell Bitcoins to those lower.
Perhaps if one of the earlier forms of digital currency had been as altruistic in their engineering they would have seen as much enthusiasm from the public.
Really? It was an altruistic project? The creators of bitcoin aren't sitting on stashes of bitcoins in the (forlorn) hope that if bitcoins ever actually take off they'll be insanely wealthy?
It is important to remember exchange rates are not static. The exchange rate is determined by the supply and demand of the two currencies for exchange. If you suddenly liquidate a lot of BitCoins all at once, you will raise the supply on the BitCoin side and thus drop the BitCoin-to-dollar exchange rate. It is not valid to take the exchange rate, multiply by the number of extant BitCoins, and declare that to be the size of the BitCoin economy in dollars; that will grossly overestimate it.
(This has nothing to do with BitCoin qua BitCoin, it's the nature of currency exchange. Because most currencies that people deal with have such enormous economic bases, people tend to reason about them such that they neglect certain terms that they don't have to worry about in practice because of sheer size. If I exchange $100 to Euros, I won't personally budge the exchange rate noticeably. But in a much smaller economy, you can't neglect such things.)
