• 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 2nd, 2023

help-circle
  • Not all gamers are triple A gamers. I’d call myself an avid gamer (I used to put in easily 80 hour weeks gaming, now it’s almost always lower, but I’ll still go on gaming binges during long vacations or holidays).

    The vast, vast majority of my time has been WoW and LoL. I have played other games throughout the years, but usually in the same genres (mmo/moba).

    A lot of these games have entry fees of below $70. Right now most of my gaming time is cata classic, and that requires $15 a month. Over time that will obviously add up, but everything adds up overtime, and $15 a month is not prohibitively expensive for most people. Also it’s really only $15 for the first month, just by leveling in cata classic to max you make enough to buy a wow token, and can easily pay $0 a month every month by just using in game currency.


  • Any chance you have an nvidia card? Nvidia for a long time has been in a worse spot on Linux than AMD, which interestingly is the inverse of Windows. A lot of AMD users complain of driver issues on Windows and swap to Nvidia as a result, and the exact opposite happens on Linux.

    Nvidia is getting much better on Linux though, and Wayland+explicit sync is coming down the pipeline. With NVK in a couple years it’s quite possible that nvidia/amd Linux experience will be very similar.


  • Nevoic@lemm.eetoTechnology@lemmy.worldHello GPT-4o
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    “they can’t learn anything” is too reductive. Try feeding GPT4 a language specification for a language that didn’t exist at the time of its training, and then tell it to program in that language given a library that you give it.

    It won’t do well, but neither would a junior developer in raw vim/nano without compiler/linter feedback. It will roughly construct something that looks like that new language you fed it that it wasn’t trained on. This is something that in theory LLMs can do well, so GPT5/6/etc. will do better, perhaps as well as any professional human programmer.

    Their context windows have increased many times over. We’re no longer operating in the 4/8k range, but instead 128k->1024k range. That’s enough context to, from the perspective of an observer, learn an entirely new language, framework, and then write something almost usable in it. And 2024 isn’t the end for context window size.

    With the right tools (e.g input compiler errors and have the LLM reflect on how to fix said compiler errors), you’d get even more reliability, with just modern day LLMs. Get something more reliable, and effectively it’ll do what we can do by learning.

    So much work in programming isn’t novel. You’re not making something really new, but instead piecing together work other people did. Even when you make an entirely new library, it’s using a language someone else wrote, libraries other people wrote, in an editor someone else wrote, on an O.S someone else wrote. We’re all standing on the shoulders of giants.


  • Nevoic@lemm.eetoTechnology@lemmy.worldHello GPT-4o
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    18 months ago, chatgpt didn’t exist. GPT3.5 wasn’t publicly available.

    At that same point 18 months ago, iPhone 14 was available. Now we have the iPhone 15.

    People are used to LLMs/AI developing much faster, but you really have to keep in perspective how different this tech was 18 months ago. Comparing LLM and smartphone plateaus is just silly at the moment.

    Yes they’ve been refining the GPT4 model for about a year now, but we’ve also got major competitors in the space that didn’t exist 12 months ago. We got multimodality that didn’t exist 12 months ago. Sora is mind bogglingly realistic; didn’t exist 12 months ago.

    GPT5 is just a few months away. If 4->5 is anything like 3->4, my career as a programmer will be over in the next 5 years. GPT4 already consistently outperforms college students that I help, and can often match junior developers in terms of reliability (though with far more confidence, which is problematic obviously). I don’t think people realize how big of a deal that is.




  • Agreed on everything, like I said in my first comment. I was fairly confident we were on the same page on everything, less cars is good, less human drivers is good, etc. I hate Musk, you hate Musk, etc.

    Also I appreciate the humility, it’s something very few people have, and what you’ve done here is what I hope I’m also able to do when needed.

    I’m fully in favor of the USSR/European/Chinese/Japanese/etc. model for public transit (prefer public transportation over cars as much as possible). It vastly outperforms the U.S in every important metric (safety, reliability, cost, etc.)

    Also agree that self-driving is a small piece of the overall picture. It’s just I think that’s the only piece Tesla really has a part in playing, most of the improvements need to happen on the government’s end.


  • you don’t want human drivers, I don’t want cars

    I’m the one misinterpreting you, yet when I explicitly advocate for public infrastructure to lessen the amount of cars, I’m somehow in favor of cars? You’re definitely projecting.

    not sure how you would have thought I was advocating for privatized public transit

    Go back and read your comment. You never said the word public, I did. We were in a conversation about Tesla and its failings, and you randomly brought up “transit”. So either you were making a completely off-topic point about something the government should do, or you were making an on-topic point about something Tesla should do. I read it as an on-topic comment.

    the proverbial carrot of “fewer road accidents” is likely to prevent regulators from taking effective steps

    Actually stop for a moment, take off your argument hat, and think about what you’re advocating for. The government has had 100 years of non-self driving cars to implement the changes you’ve wanted. They’ve failed, miserably. They’ve actually taken a ton of steps to do exactly the opposite, and have built the largest car-centric society the world has ever seen.

    Now that we have something that is statistically reducing the number of accidents on the road (autonomous vehicles, which will only get better, but already statistically outperform humans), you want private companies to revert these safety features in the hopes that the uptick in human deaths will lead to regulation that the U.S hasn’t implemented in the 100 years of sole human driving?

    Please tell me you’re just miscommunicating your position again, and that you’re actually not against the development of safety features to reduce human deaths in cars just to encourage the government to do something it hasn’t done in the past 100 years.


  • You want Tesla to create transit infrastructure? I hard disagree, that should be something the government does, not a private company. Tesla should stay in the business of making cars, and the government should move to make that obsolete in cities with good public infrastructure.

    Self-driving has pushed probably 0 people in the world from using public infrastructure to using cars. I’ve never met anyone that has said “yeah, I was using trains daily, but I decided to buy a $50,000 car with a $12,000 software upgrade to have it autonomously drive me”. You honestly think there’s a person that exists that has done this?

    Leads to unsafe situations

    Absolutely, it’s just human drivers lead to unsafe situations more often. I understand it might not feel that way, but it’s the actual truth, we have massive amounts of data on this, and your feelings don’t outweigh that.


  • Agreed on everything, just want to make sure it’s clear he’s endangering people’s lives by artificially restricting access to FSD. Supervised automated driving (that is, the car drives often drives itself point to point with no interventions) is statistically safer than the national average.

    The fact that access to this is behind a $12,000 paywall (outside of the currently running free trial) is limiting access to a software safety feature. This should be illegal.


  • Nevoic@lemm.eetoTechnology@lemmy.worldTesla scraps its plan for a $25,000 Model 2 EV
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Depends on what you’re looking for. I had a high paying tech job (layoffs op), and I wanted a fun car that accelerates fast but also is a good daily driver. I was in the ~60k price range, so I was looking at things like the Corvette Stingray, but there are too many compromises for that car in terms of daily driving.

    The Model 3 accelerates faster 0-30, and the same speed 0-60. Off the line it feels way snappier and responsive because it’s electric, and the battery makes its center of gravity lower, so it’s remarkably good at cornering for a sedan, being more comparable to a sports car in terms of cornering capabilities than a sedan.

    Those aren’t normally considerations for people trying to find a good value commuter car, so you would literally just ignore all those advantages. Yet people don’t criticize Corvette owners for not choosing a Hyundai lol

    On the daily driving front, Tesla wins out massively over other high performance cars in that price range. Being able to charge up at home, never going to a gas station, best in class driving automation/assistance software, simple interior with good control panel software, one pedal driving with regen breaking.

    If you’re in the 40k price range for a daily commuter, your criteria will be totally different, and I am not well versed enough in the normal considerations of that price tier and category to speak confidently to what’s the best value. Tesla does however, at the very least, have a niche in the high performance sedan market.


  • Nevoic@lemm.eetoTechnology@lemmy.worldTesla scraps its plan for a $25,000 Model 2 EV
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Like sure fuck Elon, but why do you think FSD is unsafe? They publish the accident rate, it’s lower than the national average.

    There are times where it will fuck up, I’ve experienced this. However there are times where it sees something I physically can’t because of either blindspots or pillars in the car.

    Having the car drive and you intervene is statistically safer than the national average. You could argue the inverse is better (you drive and the car intervenes), but I’d argue that system would be far worse, as you’d be relinquishing final say to the computer and we don’t have a legal system setup for that, regardless of how good the software is (e.g you’re still responsible as the driver).

    You can call it a marketing term, but in reality it can and does successfully drive point to point with no interventions normally. The places it does fuckup are consistent fuckups (e.g bad road markings that convey the wrong thing, and you only know because you’ve been on that road thousands of times). It’s not human, but it’s far more consistent than a human, in both the ways it succeeds and fails. If you learn these patterns you can spend more time paying attention to what other drivers are doing and novel things that might be dangerous (people, animals, etc ) and less time on trivial things like mechanically staying inside of two lines or adjusting your speed. Looking in your blindspot or to the side isn’t nearly as dangerous for example, so you can get more information.


  • In humans there’s a psychological phenomenon called “crowding out”, essentially it’s hard for our brains to attach multiple, powerful incentives to one activity. Generally the “lesser” ones get crowded out by the more important one.

    I’m still young (26), and still feel the same way about programming, I deeply enjoy it. However, I know programmers who were passionate like me when they were younger, and that passion has been slowly drained as they continue to code professionally, and I’ve seen it come back when they move into non-programming roles (be it industry change or moving to management).

    Generally you won’t find yourself wanting to program 40 hours a week, 48-50 weeks a year, for 50 years without a substantial break, and yet that’s what capitalism expects of workers. Yet you’ll continue to work because there’s a more important incentive than passion, money.

    You need money to survive (food, shelter, etc.) and your brain understands those are more important than fulfilling a passion, that’s why you’ll go to work even if you’re drained mentally. You’ll continue to do that forever so long as you don’t have the financial freedom to do otherwise (which is the goal of capitalists, this is why we have COL-based incomes, so as not to overpay people who live in cheaper areas as it’d allow them the freedom to leave).