Newest at the top
| 2026-04-03 03:01:19 +0000 | <monochrom> | Haven't you heard? Those LLMs that have learned from history are doomed to repeat it! |
| 2026-04-03 03:00:44 +0000 | <geekosaur> | ^ |
| 2026-04-03 03:00:20 +0000 | <Leary> | mesaoptimizer: LLMs do that because they ate a huge amount of text written by humans who did that. |
| 2026-04-03 03:00:17 +0000 | <EvanR> | butlerian jihad! |
| 2026-04-03 02:59:42 +0000 | <monochrom> | "I do not trust it when a computer says 1+1=2 because it's a stupid computer!" |
| 2026-04-03 02:59:37 +0000 | merijn | (~merijn@host-cl.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds) |
| 2026-04-03 02:59:37 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | okay, *at least* you aren't saying I'm wrong, I do appreciate that lol |
| 2026-04-03 02:58:57 +0000 | <monochrom> | or perhaps ad machinem? |
| 2026-04-03 02:58:54 +0000 | <EvanR> | that article isn't about LLMs or AI at all so |
| 2026-04-03 02:58:44 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | erm, I have been paid to do research engineer work on neural networks, and have worked with researchers now at DM and Anthropic |
| 2026-04-03 02:58:39 +0000 | <monochrom> | ad machina >:) |
| 2026-04-03 02:57:31 +0000 | <EvanR> | we need a new latin fallacy like ad hominem but for attacking the LLM |
| 2026-04-03 02:57:22 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | it is quite common for an LLM to add a concrete, supposedly humorous exageration as part of its triadic description for something, and you can see it with "a small municipal government's worth of bookkeeping". |
| 2026-04-03 02:56:13 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | sidenote: "Your database layer uses connection pooling, retry logic, and mutable state internally. Your cache uses concurrent mutable maps. Your HTTP client probably has circuit breakers, pooled connections, and a small municipal government's worth of bookkeeping." this is a clear indicator that an LLM was used to write this essay |
| 2026-04-03 02:55:45 +0000 | bitdex | (~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex) bitdex |
| 2026-04-03 02:54:56 +0000 | merijn | (~merijn@host-cl.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2026-04-03 02:54:22 +0000 | weary-traveler | (~user@user/user363627) user363627 |
| 2026-04-03 02:45:39 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | EvanR: it started off quite interesting, yes, which is why I even put in the effort to ask about the thing that confused me, so yes, I am reading onwards. |
| 2026-04-03 02:45:00 +0000 | arandombit | (~arandombi@user/arandombit) arandombit |
| 2026-04-03 02:45:00 +0000 | arandombit | (~arandombi@2a02:2455:8656:7100:cd4b:38a2:fba4:622b) (Changing host) |
| 2026-04-03 02:45:00 +0000 | arandombit | (~arandombi@2a02:2455:8656:7100:cd4b:38a2:fba4:622b) |
| 2026-04-03 02:44:56 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | ... sorry, that was for davean |
| 2026-04-03 02:44:47 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | EvanR: I disagree about that claim when in a cognitively adverserial environment |
| 2026-04-03 02:44:15 +0000 | merijn | (~merijn@host-cl.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) |
| 2026-04-03 02:44:02 +0000 | <davean> | Yah the obligation is on you to actually think clearly about it. |
| 2026-04-03 02:43:57 +0000 | <EvanR> | (there's a lot in there that is haskell specific, but as far as groundbreaking insights maybe not many) |
| 2026-04-03 02:43:23 +0000 | <EvanR> | otherwise don't bother |
| 2026-04-03 02:43:17 +0000 | <EvanR> | ok if you're going to analyze the article then yeah maybe read it |
| 2026-04-03 02:42:58 +0000 | arandombit | (~arandombi@user/arandombit) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 2026-04-03 02:42:56 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | so it still stands. It is not specific to Haskell. |
| 2026-04-03 02:42:30 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | Leary: perhaps I misused the word, but my point was about semantic safety, in the sense of Benjamin Pierce's definition in TAPL |
| 2026-04-03 02:42:19 +0000 | <EvanR> | as you wish |
| 2026-04-03 02:41:16 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | EvanR: not fully, of course. I imagine maybe the author wrote a bunch of bullet points up and then used an LLM to expand upon it. But all right, I'll give the essay another shot and continue reading it |
| 2026-04-03 02:40:40 +0000 | <Leary> | mesaoptimizer: You expect wrong; people use 'pure' just to mean 'pure'; there's no implicit /by construction/. |
| 2026-04-03 02:40:38 +0000 | <EvanR> | none it seems especially controversial either |
| 2026-04-03 02:40:25 +0000 | <EvanR> | tales from tech |
| 2026-04-03 02:40:19 +0000 | <EvanR> | we've seen reports like this for years |
| 2026-04-03 02:40:00 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | my conclusion is that the essay above is generated using a SOTA LLM, and therefore is adverserially generated to seem insightful, but actually be dangerously wasteful of human time |
| 2026-04-03 02:39:57 +0000 | <EvanR> | it's classic "dev speak" |
| 2026-04-03 02:39:47 +0000 | <EvanR> | that article isn't LLM style at all |
| 2026-04-03 02:39:33 +0000 | merijn | (~merijn@host-cl.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2026-04-03 02:39:19 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | I accept the existence of parts of a language that are delineated such that they do not have semantic safety in terms of abstractions that protect you from the underlying computational substrate |
| 2026-04-03 02:39:18 +0000 | <davean> | geekosaur: About unsafe stuff |
| 2026-04-03 02:38:46 +0000 | <geekosaur> | since neither compiler can give you static guarantees, it's on you as programmer using unsafe features to prove that you are actually using them safely |
| 2026-04-03 02:38:40 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | no I get that |
| 2026-04-03 02:37:48 +0000 | <geekosaur> | this is no different from https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch20-01-unsafe-rust.html |
| 2026-04-03 02:37:00 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | reminds me of LLM-generated text, which has triggered similar confusion and dicussion between I and a few of my acquaintances in the past, related to type theory and semantics. I guess its best I abandon reading this essay. |
| 2026-04-03 02:36:39 +0000 | abbies | (~abbies@tilde.guru) (Client Quit) |
| 2026-04-03 02:35:44 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | geekosaur: yeah that is now my current interpretation of it. it does seem quite confusing though |
| 2026-04-03 02:35:05 +0000 | <mesaoptimizer> | If you say something is pure, I expect that the language *guarantees* the semantics of it being pure, with the exception of the expression using, say, `unsafePerformIO`. Ergo, you cannot call those functions as those where 'the boundary cannot be violated' -- you already broke the semantic safety guarantees! |