Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | voussoir's comments login

This might not be quite as strong a rebuttal as you were hoping for!

Wow, these letters are extremely pathetic and unbecoming for a government agency. I would have expected the BBC to have more self respect than this mafia LARP.



Funny seeing these headlines come back around. Here's something from seven years ago with the same kind of problem:

[OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2016-December...


Your comment is phrased as a disagreement, but it's not. The GP post said the IRS can't do everyone's taxes, and you replied that they can do most. I think we're all on the same page that people would benefit from having available information autofilled while still having the opportunity to review and make corrections as needed.


I feel like I'm seeing an effect where some people don't want to say the word "AI" because they don't want to look like a normie, so they stick to "LLM" which sounds smarter and more technically adept. Then they complain because the LLM lacks a knowledge graph or self reflection. It's no surprise that a language model models language, not facts, especially not trivia facts which can't be deduced from anything.

If you want something to have a worldly knowledge graph and the ability to answer "I'm not sure", you'll have to ask for an AI, not an LLM.


I think that's the point of the article. It's not complaining about shortcomings, it's pointing them out.

A lot of people don't seem to understand this. A lot of people seem to think LLMs are "AI", even that they're conscious and "thinking" etc.


I say LLM because it's more specific. I still use AI to talk about things generally, like the decision making process of NPCs in video games, or deep learning algorithms, etc...

AGI is used more often in my circles to reference the, so far, non-existent self-knowledgeable artificial entity with agency.

Though to be honest, the more I think about "natural" vs "artificial", the more those two words lose all meaning. Ant hills are considered natural, and so are my skills and talents, but those were all built up over time.


Here's Matthias Wandel doing something like that with his microwave: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkqpNI7q1Dc


The other video you're referring to is "Games as a service is fraud": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUAX0gnZ3Nw


Thanks. I was thinking of one of the update videos he made later. But as long as there is proof of what he said, it still works.


Maybe it was the one called "The largest campaign ever to stop publishers destroying games". Check timestamp 24:55 (&t=1495s)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w70Xc9CStoE


Here's his other video from 2019, "Games as a service is fraud": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUAX0gnZ3Nw


> If you want to preserve a game, you have to decide what parts are important to preserve [...] you might be able to do it but you then don’t get the real game experience

The author of this website is aware of that. Everyone will come away from a game with a different favorite part, of course, but for him it's mainly about preserving the worlds and art assets, even if some of the more fancy functionality is lost.

With games as a service, your game client already has the vast majority of the assets it needs locally. The world, models, physics engine, and the ability to move through the world are already handled by the client. But they remove that online authentication lynchpin, and you're left with tens of gigabytes of assets that you can't even open to view.

In his words:

> The comparison is between a less functional game versus nothing. It's the difference between putting grandpa in a wheelchair or taking him out back and shooting him in the head.

> Battleforge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmvcJuBOaQE&t=1168s

Plus, most of the "it's too hard" would be obviated if the publishers would plan for this eventuality from the beginning. Providing a bare-minimum experience that lets you navigate the world in singleplayer should not be "too hard".


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: