Claude has always been noticeably better for Elixir for me. GPT very frequently outputs pure garbage, and as far as I can tell this release is not much different.
Humans have the ability to quickly pass things from short term to long term memory and vice versa, though. This sort of seamlessness is currently missing from LLMs.
I mean, there is. Fundamentally it involves recognizing and respecting their humanity. Just like it is incredibly rude to break up with a significant other over text, it is similarly rude to lay someone off with a pre-recorded video message. The only reason one would do either of those things is for their own benefit, because it is easier for them compared to the alternative.
>> Do you remember when a President of the United States was impeached for an affair with an adult intern?
You know, you could at least try to get your facts straight. Clinton was not impeached for his consensual affair with Lewinsky. He was impeached for lying about it under oath.
edit: providing corrections now gets posts flagged huh?
Kind of funny that you specifically pointed out the "lying under oath" part. Becaause you know, the initial argument's current POTUS lied under oath, several times, about way more dangerous things.
And he fired the people that did their job at the FBI to investigate him. Out of pure retaliation.
Intel is circling the drain. At this point I'm of the opinion that the sooner it dies the better. Its death will probably result in a lot of spin-offs and startups, which might be what the US chip industry needs.
It'll never happen. It's the standard US playbook:
- Allow industry to consolidate to a tiny group of winners, or just one winner
- Turn a blind eye to anticompetitive behavior in the marketplace
- Protect the uncompetitive winner from innovative global competitors
- Bail it out because national security depends on it
It's funny because we don't have socialism, government doesn't 'own' heavy industries, but at the same time the major firms will obviously never be allowed to fail on national security grounds.
>> But it does not sound like they made a poor choice.
I think the thing that's not obvious to young people is that choices that seem good at any given time may turn out to be poor choices further down the line. The guy who traveled the world while working one hour a day telling engineers what to do over email probably had a great young adulthood. It sounds like he paid for it later, though, by getting laid off and having difficulty finding another job.
This doesn't mean that those who worked their asses off didn't get screwed over, but on average they probably did better professionally - and by proxy, financially.
The seductive failure of doing that is what you choose to invest your saved time in, similar to financial debt.
It’s one thing if someone is iron willed enough to make productive use of their new free time.
It’s different if they use it to play video games and sleep.
Most people, if left to their own devices, will do the latter.
We can say what we want about a hard, challenging job, but it forces us to work and learn. Thus, at the end of it, we have the benefit of that working and learning.
The better question is not “How little work can I get away with doing?” but rather “What will I have at the end of this work?”
For the cat lovers among you, I strongly recommend the documentary Kedi, which is about the stray cats of Istanbul and the bonds they form with their human neighbors. Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmV-mXkfjK8
Let me rephrase: this would be interesting if he acquired and succeeded at several high-demand jobs. He did not. It is therefore not that interesting of a story.
reply