so install ruff?

Can't you just do this? Why bundle?

  uvx ruff format .

And that article is a summary of a book that contains an interview with a guy who is describing a test that took place around 2017.

Counterpoint, apparently cursor's revenue is in the 300-400 million range. So it's not wildly inconceivable that you'd do 40m profit (although I too am doubtful).

Been using YouTube recommendation blockers for a while. Personally I’ve never gone, “oh man I could go for some binge watching!” as much as something piques my interest and I get drawn down video after video of nothing. So removing any sort of advert for a video means it never even crosses my mind to turn off the blocker.

A link to a previous post is not enough, though of course appreciated. But it would be something I click on after I decide if I should spend time on the article or not. I'm not going on goose chases to figure out what the topic is.

It very very sad that some people will even say "I like to see ads, it might have something I want...". They are not just dumb, they are dangerous. This ads companies have been online for too much time. It is time to bring them down. Fast. And with them all those parasites of ads associations and marketing. We do need to bring the level of ads to 0. Then start new.

> No. We’re back to my earlier point of you and I have fundamentally different understanding of cognition, intelligence, and learning. And genuinely not trying to be condescending, but I suspect you don’t have a good grounding in the technology we’re discussing

Yeah, that definitely came off as condescending. Especially on HN, where pretty much everyone here has a grounding in the technology we're discussing. In any case, your arguments have not dealt with technology at all, but on hand-wavy distinctions like "temporality."

Anyway, to the larger point: I agree that "you and I have fundamentally different understanding of cognition, intelligence, and learning" but your inability to explain your own understanding of these terms and why they are relevant is why your arguments are unpersuasive.

> 2. LLMs clearly cannot be "actually living" but I fail to see how that's related to intelligence per se.

Ive found 'Triarchic theory of intelligence' [0] to be helpful here. It's a much more rounded approach to human intelligence that, imo, is closer to what people are trying to get at during these types of 'AI vs human intelligence' discussions. The full encompassing of human Intelligence is not something that can simply be chalked up to some set of measurements -- nor is it about a soul or whatever. If you want to say LLMs are good at a particular sets of test measurements, then okay say that. But thats not equivalent to human intelligence, it only represents a tiny measurable subset that happens to be a part of the whole

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triarchic_theory_of_intelligen...