I always felt that the decrease in intelligence is a side effect of the necessary consensus mechanisms.
10 genius clones would still take on various roles/positions in the system, requiring some optimization with respect to alignment under time/energy constraints.
This is quite the misleading wording. Britains own standards remain largely unchanged, meaning that they did not reimplement the standards enforced by the eu via national law. It follows that the standards are lower than pre brexit.
One of the steps of Brexit was incorporating all the then-existing EU standards into national law, because that was far easier than trying to figure out which regulations they wanted and which regulations they didn't in the X-month period they had.
The eu regulations no longer apply to food companies operating in the UK, as the UK no longer is in eu-jurisdiction.
The uk govt would have to re-implement them one by one, which a) would be a considerable effort and b) defeats the point of brexit, and thus likely come at political costs.
It's the opposite: Upon leaving the EU, the UK basically declared their standards to be exactly those of the EU (at the time that they left), unless the government decides otherwise (there's a bit of a fight about exactly how that happens, as I think at the moment the cabinet has the power to throw out whatever EU legislation they like, as opposed to parliament voting on each repeal, but I might be wrong about whether that actually passed).
This is better than the alternative, which would basically not having any national standards until they developed their own, but you are right that it basically means brexit has mostly increased the amount of paperwork and friction in trading but not actually produced material benefits for most industries in the UK. And in general it makes sense to follow the EU for most standards anyway: if you diverge too much you risk people just not bothering to sell in your country anyway. There's already stupid headaches like this: for EMC certification, if you need a lab to do some tests to sell in the UK and the EU, you currently need to get a lab in the UK and a lab in the EU to perform the exact same tests to the exact same standards. This means a lot of EU companies are just not bothering to certify their products for the UK market (customers will often just import them illegally).
> The uk govt would have to re-implement them one by one,
You have it backwards. They have to de-implement them in order to get rid of them. The EU doesn't have federal laws in the way that the US does, each law is independently implemented in each member state.
>For decades, the idea that they were simply pornographic objects, designed primarily for the male gaze, has remained a popular explanation, alongside the view of the artworks as fertility figures.
Instead of performing rag on the (vectorised) raw source texts, we create representations of elements/"context clusters" contained within the source, which are then vectorised and ranked. That's all I can disclose, hope that helps.
Thanks for your message. I should say that giving your comment to GPT-4, with a request for a solution architecture that could produce good results based on the comment, produced a very detailed, fascinating solution.
https://chat.openai.com/share/435a3855-bf02-4791-97b3-4531b8...
Maybe, but it expanded on the idea in the vague comment and together introduced me to the idea of embedding each sentence and then clustering the sentences, then taking the centroid of the sentences as the embedding to index/search against. I had not thought of doing that before.
After seeing raw source text performance, I agree that representational learning of higher-level semantic "context clusters" as you say seems like an interesting direction.
I have. There are multiple types of engineer which insist on migrating "legacy" (stable) systems to "state of the art" (cooler, modern, en vogue) tech.
You'd be surprised how many companies that maintained <20 vms migrated to k8s. The motivations include ordering a chaotic status quo, premature optimisation, young blood wanting to prove themselves, boredom, "its new so it must be better", "i want to try this" [...], you get the idea.
I hear loud-mouthed people at work talking about introducing "durable execution" when there's so many other fish to fry and the company can't achieve those well already.
There is a pretty big middle ground between “tech will solve every climate related problem on every axis” and “wanting to see us living in caves again”. Polar extremes are just childish.
But… that can’t possibly scale does it? Like maybe you can live a very nice life not worrying about money and having good foods, but you’re not going to get to a place where you have much more than a house and a nest egg, right? The “rich” are just the old money folks with compounding wealth. Right?
In the states, ignoring California insanity, it feels like if you can land a $200k+ job you’ll have something that feels sort of rich by the end but just barely. And that’a going to be around a top 5th percentile income for most areas.
10 genius clones would still take on various roles/positions in the system, requiring some optimization with respect to alignment under time/energy constraints.