I feel like this is very much a personal preference thing.
They even called out Horizon Zero Dawn for looking very bad, and Zelda for looking very good.. while in my opinion the exact opposite is true.
Readit Newspaulluuk commented on Games Look Bad: HDR and Tone Mapping (2017) ventspace.wordpress.com/2... · Posted by u/uncircle
paulluuk commented on NIH limits scientists to six applications per year science.org/content/artic... · Posted by u/pseudolus
Seems like a band-aid solution for a broken system.
But in general science will have to deal with that problem. Written text used to "proof" that the author spend some level of thought into the topic. With AI that promise is broken.
The question is: is AI breaking the system, or was it always broken and does AI merely show what is broken about it?
I'm not a scientist/researcher myself, but from what I hear from friends who are, the whole "industry" (which is really what it is) is riddled with corruption, politics, broken systems and lack of actual scientific interest.
paulluuk commented on An average human breathes out roughly 1kg of carbon dioxide a day twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack... · Posted by u/tosh
paulluuk commented on Why is AI so slow to spread? economist.com/finance-and... · Posted by u/1vuio0pswjnm7
> Estimating how well a new show will do with a given audience
Can you elaborate on this point?
I work in R&D, and although I haven't signed an NDA, I think it's best if I don't elaborate too much. But basically we have a large dataset of shows and movies for which we already know how well they did with specific audiences, but we didn't know why exactly. So we use LLMs to reverse-engineer a large amount of metadata about these shows, and then use traditional ML to train a model that learns which feature appeal to which audiences.
Most stuff is obvious: nobody needs to tell you what segment of society is drawn to soap operas or action movies, for example. But there's plenty of room for nuance in some areas.
This doesn't guarantee that it actually becomes a succesful movie or show, though. That's a different project and frankly, a lot harder. Things like which actors, which writers, which directors, which studio are involved, and how much budget the show has.. it feels more like Moneyball but with more intangible variables.
paulluuk commented on Why is AI so slow to spread? economist.com/finance-and... · Posted by u/1vuio0pswjnm7
Based on what you listed I would seriously consider the broader societal value of your work.
I know this is just a casual comment, but this is a genuine concern I have every day. However, I've been working for 10 years now and working in music/video streaming has been the most "societal value" I've had thus far.
I've worked at Apple, in finance, in consumer goods.. everywhere is just terrible. Music/Video streaming has been the closest thing I could find to actually being valuable, or at least not making the world worse.
I'd love to work at an NGO or something, but I'm honestly not that eager to lose 70% of my salary to do so. And I can't work in pure research because I don't have a PhD.
What industry do you work in, if you don't mind me asking?
paulluuk commented on Why is AI so slow to spread? economist.com/finance-and... · Posted by u/1vuio0pswjnm7
That's a whole lot of twisting to avoid admitting "it usually doesn't work, and even when it does work, it's usually not cost-effective even at the heavily-subsidized prices."
Or maybe it's more about refusing to admit that executives are out of touch with concrete reality and are just blindly chasing trends instead.
It really depends on the use-case. I currently work in the video streaming industry, and my team has been building production-quality code for 2 years now. Here are some things that are going really well:
* Determine what is happening in a scene/video * Translating subtitles to very specific local slang * Summarizing scripts * Estimating how well a new show will do with a given audience * Filling gaps in the metadata provided by publishers, such as genres, topics, themes * Finding the most "viral" or "interesting" moments in a video (combo of LLM and "traditional" ML)
There's much more, but I think the general trend here is not "chatbots" or "fixing code", it's automating stuff that we used armies of people to do. And as we progress, we find that we can do better than humans at a fraction of the cost.
paulluuk commented on Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update 0x44.xyz/blog/web-request... · Posted by u/deryilz
I just tried firefox because of this update but I had to switch back because it's so slow. Sacrificing competitive advantage stings too much to much just for this.
Interesting, I also just installed Firefox because of OPs comment, and I'm amazed at how much faster it is then Chrome.
I'm interested to see what this will all be in ~20 years time.
Policies with protectionist side effects (even if they're not marketed as such) have historically led to local businesses being less capable and less competitive over time. Whereby there is no need to compete or innovate as the business is insulated from genuine competition.
My assumption is that the EU believes this will lead to local businesses having the breathing space to grow to a critical mass where they could compete more robustly.
Looking back to historical examples we saw that businesses that benefitted from artificial protections were less competitive than ones that did not receive a benefit. We also saw that favoured businesses tended to be trapped inside the market where they receive those protections, i.e. they were optimised for those conditions. We see this more contemporarily with protected Russian and Chinese firms.
I am also curious if state-sponsored competitors will engineer a way around being labelled a gatekeeper. Such as by having a range of products with shared intellectual property spread across a number of legally discrete entities, effectively using a distributed form of anti-competitive practices.
I don't understand what you feel is "protectionist" about this? I would say that the US pressuring the EU on behalf of big corporations is arguably "protectionist", but I don't think that's what you mean.
But even if policies make companies less "capable" and less "competitive": that completely ignores what effect they have on society. I bet that a company that was given a free pass to use slavery would be very capable and very competitive -- but is that what we want for our society?
paulluuk commented on I deleted my second brain joanwestenberg.com/p/i-de... · Posted by u/MrVandemar
That quote doesn’t apply at all. Verbose writing doesn’t immediately indicate a lack of skill, otherwise every fiction book would’ve been reduced to a pamphlet of a summary.
If you are writing to explain, being concise is a useful asset. If you are writing to entertain, or for pleasure, verbosity and flair can be better.
I don’t get the feeling the author is trying to convince anyone of doing anything. They are sharing their experience, probably writing for themselves above everyone else. They should do it however they prefer.
I was replying specifically to the statement that writing verbosely is a form of "skilled writing", which I don't agree with. Simply being verbose does not make your writing any better.
paulluuk commented on I deleted my second brain joanwestenberg.com/p/i-de... · Posted by u/MrVandemar
Verbose, literate writers wrote like LLMs long before LLMs existed.
We taught them.
One irony now being that that form of skilled writing is inevitably and sometimes falsely accused of being machine-written.
> "I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time." - Blaise Pascal
It takes much more skill to write concise than verbose.