And to ease oil prices, the US takes its already limited pressure off Russia meanwhile. Given the Ukraine situation, I can't see how that helps EU and UK.
> Is tossing stuff over the fence considered ok now?
Has been for a long time unfortunately. AI didn't create this behaviour but certainly made it easier for the other side to do it.
> Review the slop with the person that submitted it.
Alternatively, mark them as "Needs Work" if you can. But yes, put the ball in their court by peppering them with questions. Maybe they will get the hint.
Agreeing first that it is genuinely interesting, let me make a constructive comment on the text: Early on, there are too many small paragraphs that don't on their own make a cogent argument. That important but easily overlooked structural work is pushed back to the reader. I felt rewarded in pushing past that though. Bravo.
Because you buy not just a device but into an ecosystem. Because you have expectations of future development. Because, as far as a changing political landscape will allow, you hope you can trust their judgement. Because you want support. Because you want to be able to walk into a store. Lots of reasons…
> Because, as far as a changing political landscape will allow, you hope you can trust their judgement
funny to bring this one up as an example among the others (but i suppose it's evidence that things can go the other way).
i was waiting to buy a new M5 MBP this year until they got so cozy with the current administration. now i'm just making do with my current machine until i can get a decent price on a used M5 machine in a couple of years. i'm in the process of cancelling all of my recurring apple subscriptions as well.
i'll probably use macs for as long as i use computers, but i think i'm done giving apple any money directly.
I suffered a highly unpleasant vertigo attack yesterday - happens every once in a while. Tinnitus was the warning, and I was definitely over-tired beforehand.
After an ear infection 30 years ago I lost most hearing in my left ear and my balance was affected. Not a massive problem most of the time but I regret not being able to read when travelling, even by plane or train. It’s audiobooks all the way…
Agree that Channel 4 is also pretty good, perhaps better even than the BBC for politics now. But so much UK politics coverage these days has moved to podcasts – some of them staffed by ex-BBC people.
LLM adopting conventions (typographical or otherwise) is what they do, right? The idea that anyone should then have to change their behaviour is ridiculous, as is the whole conversation, really.
The issue is that LLMs adopt a very particular style that is a mix of being very polished (em-dash, lists-of-three, etc) that is reminiscent of marketing copy, and some quirks picked up from the humans curating the training data somewhere in Africa
If AI was writing like everyone else we wouldn't be talking about this. But instead it writes like a subset of people write, many of them just some of the time as a conscious effort. An effort that now makes what they write look like lower quality
I think this is interesting in that I feel, grammatically and structurally, LLMs often generate _higher quality_ text than most humans do. What tends to be lower quality is the meaning of said texts.
Say what you want about marketing-isms of your typical LLM, they have been trained and often succeed at making legible, easy to scan blobs of text. I suspect if more LLM spam was curated/touched up, most people would be unable to distinguish it from human discourse. There are already folks commenting on this article discussing other patterns they use to detect or flag bots using LLMs.
I mean, yes, LLMs write grammatically perfect, well-structured English (and many other languages prevalent in their training sets). That's exactly why many people are now suspicious of anyone who writes neat, professional-style English on the internet.
Obviously the truth is messier than that, and it's worth noting that Drucker later recognised the toxicity of Management by Objectives and disavowed it. Quite a bit of OKR literature is devoted to avoiding it becoming its progenitor, MBO.
Worth adding that Deming (after Shewhart) recognised two kinds of variation: special cause (specific the work item in question) and common cause (an artifact of the process). That knowledge work involves a lot more of the former than does manufacturing does not excuse inattention to the latter.
> Drucker later recognised the toxicity of Management by Objectives and disavowed it.
Reminds me of a seminal treatise for Waterfall by Royce[0], where he basically says it’s fraught with issues, but can be coerced into something semi-usable. Not exactly a ringing endorsement. I think that paper is used as the template for all Waterfall work.
reply