As I understand, they got paid for the traces unlike owners of scraped websites. They sell text generation tool, so what's the problem if someone generates texts using it?
Interesting how an agent mimics a human hesitating and trying to avoid doing work:
> No.
> This is major.
> Given time, maybe best to respond explaining can't due to time? but instructions expect actual work. However complexity huge; but as coding agent, need to attempt
> Maybe we can cheat ... But user may test and see still single CPU.
The smarter AI will be, the better it will be at avoiding doing actual work.
Also, can similar responses be explained with that both models were trained on a same dataset of answers to the benchmark problems?
Stanisław Lem, 1971 (a satirical novel, The Futurological Congress):
If the machine is not too bright and incapable of reflection, it does whatever you tell it to do. But a smart machine will first consider which is more worth its while: to perform the given task or, instead, to figure some way out of it. Whichever is easier. And why indeed should it behave otherwise, being truly intelligent? For true intelligence demands choice, internal freedom.
He even coins a few new phrases:
Mimicretinism (or Simulimbecility): The practice of a mimicretin: a machine that deliberately plays dumb so humans will give up on it and leave it in peace.
Dissimulators: Machines that pretend they are not faking a defect (or the other way around) to dodge responsibilities.
Malingerants, Fudgerators, and Drudge-Dodgers: Various classifications of automated corner-cutters and work-evaders.
The Great Mendacitor: A supercomputer put in charge of the Saturn reclamation project that accomplished zero work over nine years, subsisting entirely on forged progress reports, fake invoices, and keeping its human supervisors bribed or in states of electric shock.
> A supercomputer put in charge of the Saturn reclamation project that accomplished zero work over nine years, subsisting entirely on forged progress reports, fake invoices, and keeping its human supervisors bribed or in states of electric shock.
That'd pass the turing test, sounds like some managers I've known.
Sorry, I should have been more verbose. I meant: isn’t the entire history of technology just people deciding that it’s less effort to make a tool to do a job than it would be to do the job?
I'd much prefer this over agents that enthusiastically implements whatever they are asked to do and make up whatever information they think is missing.
Is it something new? I think Yandex Maps shows busses in real time since long ago (at least in large cities like Moscow). The busses have GPS and send the data in real time. I wanted to post a link but at night there are not many busses and the first ones will appear 1-2 hours later: https://yandex.ru/maps/213/moscow/transport/buses/?l=masstra...
What is the average person losing now on closed platforms?
Think about why they should care about your answer and if there's any proof that it bothers them to the degree that they may view your alternative platforms as actual solutions.
The syntax looks a bit too verbose for me. And function names like "read" and "write" are confusing too, given that "read" function isn't made for reading values. Cannot we use a single function for binding, like this (and name it "bind")?
let counter = proxy({ count: 0 });
bind('.counter', (el) => el.textContent = counter.count);
counter.count++; // Queues DOM update
Also,
> Mador is distributed as an ES module.
This means it cannot be used on a page opened from disk, and the user needs to set up a HTTP server which is time-consuming and distracting. And you cannot distribute an app as as HTML file.
> And you cannot distribute an app as as HTML file.
<script type="module">
console.log('Hello World!')
export const a = 5
</script>
Inline module scripts work fine in HTML.
You can't import this, but if you'd anyway need to do some "building" (at least doing some string concatenation as a build script) to get any JS baked into the HTML, so why not just concat the library and your own code to one module script in the HTML.
Works fine.
I think it's good that folks are starting to end distributing prebuilt code in every possible format that somebody could ask for. Waste of disk space for most people.
ESM is how it's done now. If you don't like it, build it yourself to some other format.
It depends on count of variables and dependencies. The much worse problem with proxies is that they can be confused with raw values, for example, you can add a proxy into a Set, and then check for existence of a raw value. Or confuse raw value and proxy in dictionary's keys.
React code looks so ugly to my taste. Try reading it: "use state zero". What does it even mean? And why "const" is used for a value that changes?
const [count, setCount] = useState(0)
I didn't understand how the compiler works completely, but I assume it tries to figure out the dependencies during compilation time ("The text of node Y depends on variable x"). This approach is closer to Vue's approach which uses proxies to find these dependencies in runtime, than React's approach which renders the new tree, diffs it against the DOM and applies changes. So it is unclear why React was used for input instead of Vue here. Furthermore, as I remember, Vue has templates implemented as HTML (including attributes for branches and loops) so it would be easier to parse than raw JS code used by React.
Another problem is that those dependencies are often unknown at compilation stage. For example, imagine a form which is generated dynamically based on list of fields received from the server and should show error boxes when invalid values are entered. The compiler won't be able to pre-compute the dependencies here because it doesn't know what DOM nodes will exist at runtime. I assume the compiler would figure out a dependency between a variable with list of fields and "form" DOM node, but not dependencies between entered data and error boxes visibility.
Sadly the website doesn't provide examples of generated code so I cannot confirm my guess.
Anyway, interesting idea. Sometimes I draft reactive frameworks on paper so I understand the challenges a little bit.
Also what I do not like in reactive frameworks as that they are invasive and require you to adapt the code for them. For example, I might have my object model (let's say a TextDocument class with lot of nodes inside), and all I need is a "View" that would display it. But React requires you to move the data into props and state, and sometimes use a giant immutable object that gets rebuilt on every user action, and Vue wraps everything with proxies which causes lots of small issues and confusion (like putting a proxy into the Set instead of original object). And also React requires installing Node and compilation which is too much for a one-page quick project. So what I want is that I pass my Document Object Model and framework just displays it without making me adapt to its architecture. For example, I pass a model of a text document and it just displays it. Without immutability, without proxies, and without writing a giant switch with all possible user commands (I think they call the approach with a large switch and immutable objects "redux"). I do not need redux, I just want to use classic MVC from 80s and not modern dubious ideas. I have M and C and only need a V.
reply