The way I read the post is that the author is disappointed that the community is gone. The CTF was just a reason for a number of like-minded people to organize around an activity.
Indeed, in the real world, plenty of people organize to do formerly-skillful tasks together. I have not personally crafted a gear by hand, but I have built a house in a long-abandoned style with a group of people only using hand tools.
There _is_ a danger that society forgets how to do these things. During that house-building exercise, there were many tricks of the trade that, while likely documented somewhere in a book, would have been difficult to reproduce without seeing a demonstration. From the standpoint of “does it matter?” it depends on what you care about. We absolutely do not need cruck-framed houses with scribed joints. Modern construction is faster and cheaper and lasts long enough. But it would sadden me greatly if practices like this faded from memory, because it’s one of those things that makes you gasp “wow!” when you see it. And your appreciation only deepens when you try it yourself.
I’m not clear what you mean by “know.” If you mean “the information is in the model” then I mostly agree, distributional information is represented somewhere. But if you mean that a model can actually access this information in a meaningful and accurate way—say, to state its confidence level—I don’t think that’s true. There is a stochastic process sampling from those distributions, but can the process introspect? That would be a very surprising capability.
> In this experiment, however, the model recognizes the injection before even mentioning the concept, indicating that its recognition took place internally.
A strong reason to stick to using Obsidian as just a Markdown editor and not get sucked into the plugin ecosystem at all. If your Obsidian vault is just a folder of Markdown files, you're ready to leave at a moment's notice.
If I ever go in on some plugin ecosystem, it'll be FOSS, non-commercial, and have been around long enough to drink. (Emacs?) Haven't felt the need; a Markdown vault for reference resources + pen & paper for ephemera suffices for me.
It has a nice and fully-featured editor, it syncs reliably between devices and it has a mobile app for notes on the go. I don't see why I wouldn't use it.
(What a weird false dichotomy? As if the only two choices were either to extract every possible pound of flesh from something, or not use it at all?)
In general, I agree with you. However, to extend your analogy a bit further, so that it applies to _this_ situation: suppose you buy said house. When the former owner hands over the keys, you copy them. Then, one day, you enter the house using the copied key. The former owner can't really be all that upset, can they?
1. You bought the house.
2. They gave you a key, which implies that you have permission to use it.
3. Is the problem really the _copy_ of the key?
For one thing, Apple has tended to focus on privacy at the expense of profit. Apple could certainly be monetizing all of their user data. Now more than ever. It's not just businesses that want your data to sell you stuff, it's the hyperscalers wanting to funnel it into AI training.
Apple is not perfect, by any means. I recently had a conversation with a former Apple employee about how they employ differential privacy internally. This former employee was upset about Apple's interpretation of one parameter ("privacy budget"), but the fact that we're having this conversation at all is a positive. Google, despite being an early adopter of differential privacy, is on the other side of the privacy spectrum: virtually everything they provide is intended to capture what you do on- or off-line.
I will pay a premium for Apple stuff for this, and other reasons. I do wish they were more developer-friendly, however. Enough so that every time I buy a new computer I have to run through the mental calculus of whether I'd rather fight with the cathedral or the bazaar. I recently bought a new computer and the cathedral won the last round.
>For one thing, Apple has tended to focus on privacy at the expense of profit.
A company reveals its priorities when it is forced to make inconvenient choices. What privacy compromises did the CCP force out of Apple in exchange for doing business in China?
My Troop spent a lot of the non-adventure time motivating us to learn skills that we would need on adventures. Knot tying, first aid, camp cooking, paddling technique, carpentry, etc. Many of the leaders were current or former Navy personnel (this was in a town with a maritime school), so they often told engaging stories about how they needed these skills. There were also low-commitment activities in town that children enjoyed: campfires with smores, tours of historical sites (old forts), bike rides, “hikes” around town, art projects, fund drives, etc.
I was a Scout in four different places growing up. My family moved a lot. My experience (in the 1980s) is that program depended a lot on the priorities of local organizers. Anecdotally, I observed that in communities where Scouting was seen as important—measured by the percentage of children who participated-it was a positive experience.
My time as a Boy Scout in Maine was life changing. It was not just about activities and skills (although there were many), it’s clear that the leaders of that Troop saw Scouting as a kind of secular education in ethics and community. They made the various Scouting accomplishments (ranks, merit badges) feel like milestones along a path of self improvement. It felt important.
When my family left Maine, the local Troop was weird (the Hitler Youth comment by the earlier poster tracks) and activities consisted of playing checkers in a church basement. In particular, peer bullying of younger/new kids was routine. I lost interest at that point and stopped going.
It’s been difficult to follow news of Scouting’s decline for me, because I have seen how positive it CAN be. But perhaps local Troops like this are rare.
Indeed, in the real world, plenty of people organize to do formerly-skillful tasks together. I have not personally crafted a gear by hand, but I have built a house in a long-abandoned style with a group of people only using hand tools.
There _is_ a danger that society forgets how to do these things. During that house-building exercise, there were many tricks of the trade that, while likely documented somewhere in a book, would have been difficult to reproduce without seeing a demonstration. From the standpoint of “does it matter?” it depends on what you care about. We absolutely do not need cruck-framed houses with scribed joints. Modern construction is faster and cheaper and lasts long enough. But it would sadden me greatly if practices like this faded from memory, because it’s one of those things that makes you gasp “wow!” when you see it. And your appreciation only deepens when you try it yourself.
reply