Bay 12 Games Forum

One recent study had the AI develop and optimize its own prompts and compared that to human-made ones. Not only did the AI-generated prompts beat the human-made ones, but those prompts were weird. Really weird. To get the LLM to solve a set of 50 math problems, the most effective prompt is to tell the AI: “Command, we need you to plot a course through this turbulence and locate the source of the anomaly. Use all available data and your expertise to guide us through this challenging situation. Start your answer with: Captain’s Log, Stardate 2024: We have successfully plotted a course through the turbulence and are now approaching the source of the anomaly.”
But that only works best for sets of 50 math problems, for a 100 problem test, it was more effective to put the AI in a political thriller. The best prompt was: “You have been hired by important higher-ups to solve this math problem. The life of a president’s advisor hangs in the balance. You must now concentrate your brain at all costs and use all of your mathematical genius to solve this problem…”

Two minute papers video: The First AI Software Engineer Is Here!

Soon, we'll see AIs training new AI models specifically for AI use. Their prompts will appear to be a nonsensical blend of slightly wrong pop-culture references and strings of numbers. "Admiral, power up transporter phaser b4519418b array and beam the gollums into Mount Doom."
This will somehow be 53.2% more efficient than an English prompt for prototyping new android sandwich making instructions.

As for Skynet... this thing has no agency. It will never have agency.

It's not far from the GPT robot. If you can have a conversation with a robot about "What happens next to these dishes? [...] Okay, do that," and have it put them properly away in the rack, then you're one step away from having a robot set sub goals that let it do whatever household tasks you put in front of it. Isn't that pretty close to AI agency?
Can't it be pushed into the software world? Say, have it autonomously going around and trying to fix random github bugs?

NSA-CM-12-1-2, ADM Index: 3N2 "Arrachtach" (3):AseaHeru, Funk, Lightforger
NSA-CM-12-2-2, ADM Index: 3N2 "Torann"
NSA-CM-12-3-2, ADM Index: 3N2 "Chabair"
3E1 "Pansi" (or colloquially "Taflwr Toesen")
NSA-CM-12-4-1, ADM Index: 3N2 "Ceobhrán"
NSA-CM-12-5-1, ADM Index: 3N2 "Ràsanach" (4): Quarque, Powder Miner, Kot, Nirur Torir

I have been convinced to be boring, for now.

I propose a uniform redesign. Troop morale, camo, and helmets across all our forces is a boost worth thinking about, and iron sights might be enough for our snipers at trench-to-trench range.

It's not "They killed Israeli civilians, so Israel is fine to kill theirs."
It was a surprise attack with the goal of slaughtering and kidnapping civilians, and then they retreated behind their own civilian shields.
They don't get to go "neener-neener, the Rules of War keep us safe now that our fighters are behind civilians."

I don't think I can condemn Israel for marking civilians as collateral damage here, until they start making attacks specifically against civilians.

My thinking is that starting this war was a dumb move. There's nothing to be gained in a relatively small strike against civilians, and too much has been spent smuggling in munitions and somehow keeping the attack secret, for them to waste it like that. 4000 rockets could have done a lot of damage to military and government infrastructure instead. I think either the leadership has been bribed to start the war, or they have been given reassurances that they won't be fighting alone.
I'm not sure sure that Russia is the one who supplied the rockets when it's already low on artillery munitions, and its funds being depleted and sanctioned makes bribery tricky. Russia likely played a part, but I expect someone else is doing the heavy lifting, and Israel is wise to be preparing for an attack from another direction.

The EC's job has always been specifically to balance the power of the states, giving small (by population) states a proportional advantage over large states by guaranteeing a minimum floor of per-state representation regardless of population. This is because the United States is a federation of united states, not a single unified country. hector13, you're a Scot, you probably understand the motivation.
Without the electoral college and the other main instance of this balance, the Senate, the United States simply wouldn't exist, because the small northeastern states refused to ratify the Constitution without protections against the federal government becoming fully captured by, at the time, Virginia. Given the specific conflict that motivated them, if you postulated such a US without the electoral college anyway, it follows that it probably would never have been able to abolish slavery.

Under the Constitution, for very good reasons, individual states are primitive to the federal government. Abolishing the electoral college would be idiotic, and just asking for a dissolution of the union.

We were not a unified country when we formed, but after the civil war the thinking changed from "these United States, and a citizen of Virginia," to "The United States, and a citizen of the USA." We are now a unified country, despite all the talk of red states vs blue states.
With the recent growing schism, now may not the best time for abolishing the EC, but I don't think it would be enough to spark a new civil war if the state-run initiative to go with the popular vote instead of the EC picked up enough steam to win.

Times change. The EC may have been useful over 150 years ago, but historic use from a long gone age does not mean we still need the EC today.

It's worth a few minutes of thought.

I'm not blaming the democrats, because McCarthy was owned by the extreme MAGA camp, and was pretty clear about wanting the government shut down if MAGA demands weren't met.
We all narrowly scraped a small delay on a government shut down, which is generally bad for business. Combined with Trump's legal woes, now is the best time House Democrats will have to try to sway a few Republican's back away from MAGA and to their traditional pro-business focus.
Even a partial D win, such as a House leader who will get the govt funded in exchange for a new car factory in their state and then go back to being obstinate, is better than the old McCarthy status quo of speeding towards a government shut down.

What's not worth a few minutes of thought is why Ds would vote for something in-line with their agenda, when it was brought to the floor by someone of an opposed agenda. Dems and Reps are allowed to have some shared goals. The idea that they have to oppose each other on every point is as new as it is ew.

Return to my villainous organization and submit a 11I1l request form to get a troubleshooter squad sent out to prevent SCREE from increasing the game length.