Engineer at Donor to LW 2.0.

Wiki Contributions


Yeah I figured Scott Sumner must have been involved.

Nitpick: Larry Summers not Larry Sumners

  • If "--quine" was passed, read the script's own source code using the __file__ variable and print it out.

Interesting that it included this in the plan, but not in the actual implementation.

(Would have been kind of cheating to do it that way anyway.)

Worth noting 11 months later that @Bernhard was more right than I expected. Tesla did in fact cut prices a bunch (eating into gross margins), and yet didn't manage to hit 50% growth this year. (The year isn't over yet, but I think we can go ahead and call it.)

Good summary in this tweet from Gary Black:

$TSLA bulls should reduce their expectations that $TSLA volumes can grow at +50% per year. I am at +37% vol growth in 2023 and +37% growth in 2024. WS is at +37% in 2023 and +22% in 2024.

And apparently @MartinViecha head of $TSLA IR recently advised investors that TSLA “is now in an intermediate low-growth period,” at a recent Deutsche Bank auto conference with institutional investors. 35-40% volume growth still translates to 35-40% EPS growth, which justifies a 60x-70x 2024 P/E ($240-$280 PT) at a normal megacap growth 2024 PEG of 1.7x.

And this reply from Martin Viecha:

What I said specifically is that we're between two major growth waves: the first driven by 3/Y platform since 2017 and the next one that will be driven by the next gen vehicle.

let’s build larger language models to tackle problems, test methods, and understand phenomenon that will emerge as we get closer to AGI

Nitpick: you want "phenomena" (plural) here rather than "phenomenon" (singular).

I'm not necessarily putting a lot of stock in my specific explanations but it would be a pretty big surprise to learn that it turns out they're really the same.

Does it seem to you that the kinds of people who are good at science vs good at philosophy (or the kinds of reasoning processes they use) are especially different?

In your own case, it seems to me like you're someone who's good at philosophy, but you're also good at more "mundane" technical tasks like programming and cryptography. Do you think this is a coincidence?

I would guess that there's a common factor of intelligence + being a careful thinker. Would you guess that we can mechanize the intelligence part but not the careful thinking part?

Happiness has been shown to increase with income up to a certain threshold ($ 200K per year now, roughly speaking), beyond which the effect tends to plateau.

Do you have a citation for this? My understanding is that it's a logarithmic relationship — there's no threshold. (See the Income & Happiness section here.)

Why antisocial? I think it's great!

Load More