Windex007

Trick here is you need to volunteer something spicy first to lay the foundation that it's safe to be spicy.

If you come out of the gate with spicy questions without calibrating what spicy is, expect plain answers regardless of the quality of the questions.

Relatively low hanging fruit is to get them to weigh in on a disagreement with two spicy sides... if it's framed as being between you and someone you respect already, and you volunteer your own spicy take, that provides the safety for the other person to get involved

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

Really wish there was the complete data set rather than just looking at the immediate run up to the dot Com burst, and then from that peak to the trough of the aftermath of the 08 crash.

My idiot cat loves vacuums. Dives in front if them like they're security taking a bullet for some VIP.

She wants to get vacuumed. Makes hair management pretty easy since she'll enthusiastically let us vacuum the source.

IPoAC is my personal favorite

"Relationship Builder"

Outsources interacting with thier own children.

That is roughly the premise of Beavis and Butthead

People run whisper on HA, and there already exist intention mapping packages. They've been around for probably a decade already. Pretty hit or miss... mostly because there isn't a ton of flexibility in the structure of the commands you issue it.

If someone wanted to use an online LLM to attempt to translate a complex whisper transcription into something an existing intention mapped would handle well, that's closer to a day's worth of goofing around rather than a year. I actually refuse to believe it hasn't already been done.

And if you're using an online llm to do that translation, I don't see why that can't be behind a paywall either.

Honestly for this task, I imagine offline models would be sufficient.

I dunno. Timeliness seems reasonable.

AGI in 18 months. Start a timer in 12. I think a clock is roughly 66% of the complexity of AGI. Math checks out.

Give me a P!

Imagine having to, because the most self-righteous, selfish people that possibly exist, opted to take "absolutr worst" over "bad"... and are still justifying it. Still lording thier moral superiority over the rest of us. Still incapable of grasping that thier self satisfaction came at a tangible cost to humans lives.

A big part of maturity, perhaps all of it, is recognizing that sometimes, you do need to degrade yourselves for others. Maybe not even to make things good for them, even just less bad.

Does it make me feel good to boil this down to an analogy like I'm talking to a 2 year old? No. It's degrading to say. I expect it's degrading to hear. But some people still don't get it.

The original person I responded to was describing the paradox as a social contract, and I was saying I don't think it really makes sense conceptually as a social contract for reasons. What I'm hearing you say is that it it prescribes nothing, so I would infer that to mean that is isn't really an agreement either, so not really a social contract either.

I still get the feeling that we're roughly at the same place but took different paths to get there