Jesus, this is why online commentary is impossible to read. It's always full of so many caveats I can't get through to the meat of what someone is saying. "I don't know if what I'm saying is right but I think that it probably is. With that caveat, here's a thought that may or may not reflect reality but is my current model to predict certain things. $THOUGHT. Given that I have said that, I have to confess to not living my life entirely by that maxim. I may not have captured all angles to this."
Thankfully, the rationalists just state their ideas and you're free to use their models properly. It's like people haven't written code at all. Just putting repeated logging all through the codebase with null checks everywhere. Just say the thing. That suffices. Conciseness rules over caveating.
Human LLMs who use idea expansion. Insufferable.
Of course that is only my opinion and I may not have captured all angles to why people are doing that. They may have reasons of their own to do that and I don't mean to say that there can never be any reasons. No animals were harmed in the manufacture of this comment to my knowledge. However, I did eat meat this afternoon which could or could not be the source of the energy required to type this comment and the reader may or may not have calorie attribution systems that do or do not allocate this comment to animal harm.
Thankfully, the rationalists just state their ideas and you're free to use their models properly. It's like people haven't written code at all. Just putting repeated logging all through the codebase with null checks everywhere. Just say the thing. That suffices. Conciseness rules over caveating.
Human LLMs who use idea expansion. Insufferable.
Of course that is only my opinion and I may not have captured all angles to why people are doing that. They may have reasons of their own to do that and I don't mean to say that there can never be any reasons. No animals were harmed in the manufacture of this comment to my knowledge. However, I did eat meat this afternoon which could or could not be the source of the energy required to type this comment and the reader may or may not have calorie attribution systems that do or do not allocate this comment to animal harm.