Solid agree. Hallucination for me IS the LLM use case. What I am looking for are ideas that may or may not be true that I have not considered and then I go try to find out which I can use and why.
Money as "life energy" approach helps me be thrifty, but my real struggle is how do I asses risk when I want to buy an asset. If I wanted to use $500 from my work to buy a share of SpaceX, does it provide a better return than any other investment at some acceptable risk ? I don't see the life energy approach as helping this question but I need to read the book you recommend.
Note that SpaceX is not publically traded, but it represents assets I would like to own.
Its a paywall. Just I have to pay with info rather than money. It is not free.
To accomplish the goal of knowing how my congresscritter (really?) matches with me, I should not need an account. If I wanted you to contact them for me then OK but to call the site useless without an account just makes it so.
If all this is true, I would have a problem with a co-worker who would stand up and lie. By starting the meeting by being "super supportive" while knowing along with co-conspirators that you were trying to kill it, a good deal of creditability has been destroyed.
Maybe I am naive, and this is how things really get done, but regardless of which side I might have been on during this meeting, he is no longer trusted.
I think there are some visionary things here but he misses the 'consent' part. By using free services we do give consent and if we don't like the privacy policies of Facebook et al then nobody forces us to use them. Yes providers should be honest about their policies and some do play dirty tricks. We learn which ones are not really honest so if we keep using them, we can’t really claim surprise or lack of consent.
Free stuff costs. Not money but there are costs. In the future world he is imagining there will be some who want to pay for their own machines and control the software that runs on them.
Being a parasite means riding a host and giving up some critical decisions about where and how the host lives.
My point was not meant to imply they would accept bribes. They do the job to fight fires so why agree with the idea that we should stop them when some equipment was not yet fully amortized? If they accept bribes or not, the idea you stop volunteers from doing what they want (fight fires) is wrong.
The solution of including the cost of fire fighting in the cost of owning the house itself helps fix what I see as the mistake in thinking that I don't benefit from having my neighbors house fire put out.
If volunteer fire fighters are told by the people who they protect that it is ok to watch a house burn (because necessary costs were not covered somehow) then philosophically what is to stop them from not helping when I don't slip them extra money because their labor is volunteer anyway? I think this eats at the soul of the community.
So I would say your point hinges on the difference between access (information) and understanding (knowledge). Both can be true that the access is available to all, but the ability to understand and use something depends on a non-trivial amount of time that noteveryone invests.
I am coming from a similar place but not yet launched my site. I have thought about the challenge you describe, and there are many on this site with advice that can help.
Whatever size voice you might have, it is louder when you use it locally. Are you and your friends using it to help people? Are the people then helped not willing to try it?
I can’t see your site from my current location but with local and modest goals you might be surprised who the influentials are and what karma they might really want.
In the main I agree, but despite the buzzwords if the corporation really believes and acts as if "employees are the most important asset" and it truly gets that to be profitable it needs to take care of the "knowledge workers" (whatever that means) then it may be that some companies, because of their profit motive, are worthy of some loyalty. Most companies fall short of the ideal so professionalism is more than a second best in this case.
Good points about automating the processes which surround your cloud, but I don’t think the author takes it far enough.
To get the most from cloud computing I am hoping we see cross cloud automation. With sufficient metadata surrounding the both the inputs/outputs and the preconditions/effects of processes in a cloud, it should be possible to discover a service, understand what it does, then make use of it without additional development.
I won’t go far as to say this means these steps are fully automated, but I think with some automated support, this process is seconds or minutes, not hours or days.
This seems intuitive and if its true that the cost is ONLY for that service and not ALSO for the superior research and development, then I would agree.
I don’t know for sure but my hope would be that at least some relatively routine/commoditized stuff is higher in America to pay for things that aren’t being done in other places.
In any case Dean Kamen makes some great points about moving beyond fear based legislation.
While I can accept the strong notion that no person can navigate, this does not map to navigation doesn’t happen. Smith's invisible hand ala co-evolution (and more appropriately natural selection) guides technology perhaps even more than economics or biology.
I want to spend more time reading the article because the suggestion to let it these curves guide investment and personal application of time and effort seems less than straightforward.
In the spirit of the article I will state as a highly organized type that I stopped reading at this point since the rules of Monopoly clearly state that cash is not placed at Free Parking and it is simple a resting place. http://www.hasbro.com/common/instruct/monins.pdf
I found correlations in this to the process of moving (kicking and screaming) from a technical to business development role. No user cares (and no user should care) about the deep underlying "how" something works. They care about what it does for them, and like the article said good aesthetic design is more than just beautiful.