It being open source also allows you to actually have a read of the software and guarantee things yourself, which is the harder better path anyway.

I expected companies actually serving an API for LLMs to peruse, but this is a less technical take, and definitely food for thought.

History of invention in the science of mathematics would show that there is nothing that's useless in the long term. It's all pieces of a puzzle.

I agree with you in principle, but in my mind there's a slight disconnect between a proof of a theorem that can freely be built upon by the mathematical community and the social media integration no one asked for that a 5 person point-of-sale startup writes months before going bankrupt.

New mathematical concepts are usually published in scholarly journals so it's possible to dig them up decades later when they're needed. But most companies never publish stuff that doesn't work, and don't even make any effort to learn from it internally. So they make the same mistakes over and over again.

Nah, most remain useless.

Inventions that were initially useless but found application later, are still in the very small minority.

One can deprioritise health but what does it bring long time? I know it sounds cliche, so I will add that sometimes sacrificing health a little bit is worth pondering.

In a certain Euroland country an analogous delivery company just awards the driver minimum hourly payment on certain agreed before hours if they're clearly working but circumstances had them earn less. Minimum wage requirements stifle nothing.

It's also appears to be a hustle side job employer in PR regarding employment MO, while clearly trying to capture the market for deliveries in weekday work hours.

I think that the best aspect of games or challenges based directly on real life concepts is that the tutorial is the real thing's tutorial. So in this case the man pages and stack overflow.

I thought it was easy: watch videos with your kid, don't allow them to doomscroll or be raised by the "featured"/"front page" algorithms.

You can't be with your child 100% of the time. They are spending significant time with others, e.g. in school. Those people you can't control.

Doomscrolling or porn is just too "appealing" to children, like sugar. Children don't have their minds fully developed to be able to say "no" to them.

If in school everybody has a smartphone and does doomscrolling, your children will do as well. Or they'll be ostracised.

A hangout for 11-16 year olds often seems to devolve into a bunch of kids all watching their own phones. It's really depressing to watch, though they do seem to play as well.

We have had several arguments about no social media and we're only 1 out of 6-ish years in to the too naïve to look after yourself on the internet phase, and the eldest already figured out how to download some chat app I'd never even heard of without permission.

How to show you're clearly not a parent in one sentence.

How does one make sure the implementation is sufficient and complete? It feels like assuming total knowledge of the world, which is never true. How many false positives and false negatives do we tolerate? How does it impact a person?

I'm not sure. We can use LLMs to try out different settings/algorithms and see what it is like to have it on a social level before we implement it for real.

Perhaps but I am not entirely optimistic about LLM's in this context but hey perhaps freedom to do this and then doing it might make a dent after all, one can never know until they experiment I guess

Fair, I don't know how valuable it would be. I think LLMs would only get you so far. They could be tried in games or small human contexts . We would need a funding model that rewarded this though.

That is hard too though.