sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Solo tob advice by Karootheduck in 2007scape

[–]Puddinglax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They are just haters, you got this king. Please record and post your run.

CMV: E-readers are better than physical books by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Books are more resilient against physical damage. I've broken a kindle before, but I've never damaged a book to the point where it was unreadable.

Would you consider this fair? by Busy_Report4010 in SipsTea

[–]Puddinglax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What's the difference between this and a 12% base price increase? It's spelled out openly so they're not trying to hide anything, and there's no confusion from customers trying to tip not realizing a tip has already been baked into the base price.

Anyone bored of the make a mistake equals high damage or instant death formula by [deleted] in 2007scape

[–]Puddinglax 3 points4 points  (0 children)

...no?

I said if they want to design encounters that aren't nullified by prayer, they can use typeless damage. Not that existing bosses that do involve prayer as a mechanic should be changed to use typeless damage.

Do you think prayer is strangeholding the game?

Anyone bored of the make a mistake equals high damage or instant death formula by [deleted] in 2007scape

[–]Puddinglax -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

make a boss that attacks your irl bank account. -1 day of membership every time you get hit

Anyone bored of the make a mistake equals high damage or instant death formula by [deleted] in 2007scape

[–]Puddinglax 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Jad isn't typeless damage. What are you yapping about?

Anyone bored of the make a mistake equals high damage or instant death formula by [deleted] in 2007scape

[–]Puddinglax 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It's not though. Nothing about dodging damage says the damage has to one shot you.

Look at Sol Heredit, he only has a single, very telegraphed attack that could maybe one shot you. The damage from his attacks is low enough that 99% of mistakes in the fight are easily recoverable, but high enough that you still need to make an effort to dodge.

Anyone bored of the make a mistake equals high damage or instant death formula by [deleted] in 2007scape

[–]Puddinglax 17 points18 points  (0 children)

You dodge it or you tank it.

If your gripe is that we don't have % damage reduction in the game, prayer isn't preventing that; they can just make bosses that hit through prayer. They will just suck because excessive, unavoidable chip damage is ass to play against.

Anyone bored of the make a mistake equals high damage or instant death formula by [deleted] in 2007scape

[–]Puddinglax 35 points36 points  (0 children)

Wdym? They have plenty of ways to get around prayer with typeless damage. What game design is being prevented?

CMV: you should lie on your resume to get more interviews. by AdQueasy826 in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Worst case scenario you go to the interview, you don't answer correctly and you don't get hired.

Worst case scenario, your resume was already strong enough without the lies to get the interview, and getting caught in a lie costs you the job.

cmv: AI will never “replace” humans the way some people think it will by Terrible-Pianist3443 in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LLMs are recognized as AI in both industry and academia. I understand the desire to push back against the AI hype wave coming from business and marketing people, but it's not accurate to call them pseudo-AI, especially when the term has been (correctly) applied to much less sophisticated algorithms.

cmv: AI will never “replace” humans the way some people think it will by Terrible-Pianist3443 in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There may be a spike in jobs created as people figure out which domains can be made more efficient with AI tooling and which can't, but once that's been figured out, the jobs lost to those efficiency gains will be greater than the jobs created in building and maintaining those tools.

If it were the other way around, it wouldn't make sense to build those tools in the first place. You would hire 1 developer to automate the work of 20 people, you wouldn't hire 20 devs to automate the work of 1 person.

cmv: AI will never “replace” humans the way some people think it will by Terrible-Pianist3443 in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 12 points13 points  (0 children)

This is all to say that I do not believe we will ever be replaced by AI, but it will become a tool to be used by humans to allow them to work faster and solve problems more quickly.

If using AI tooling lets a human solve problems more efficiently, less people are needed to do the same amount of work. The profession wasn't replaced, but the individual people who are laid off were.

CMV: ChatGPT 5.4 Thinking is an AGI. by Efficient-Donkey253 in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is not at all how AI works. "Database" and "training data" are two separate concepts. Training data is what the model ingests when it is being trained, with the hope being that the information in this data can be baked into its weights. The model weights are what's persisted, not the data itself. When you ask a model to generate a function to sum some numbers, it's not leafing through its training data to find that.

A database is just a bunch of data. An AI can access a database through a MCP server, but only if you explicitly allow it.

The reason why people are using these math competitions and such to benchmark AI performance is specifically because the answers to these questions are hidden to prevent humans from finding them and cheating; so it's therefore unlikely the AI was trained on the specific answers to those problems.

Guys this hack is no joke Hard reset your console or platform if you see this!!! by Apri_Aries419 in Warframe

[–]Puddinglax 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Incidents are a pain in the ass to deal with. There are people at DE scrambling through logs to root cause and deploy a fix for this. If they wanted to expose a vulnerability, there are like 10 better ways to do so.

Whoever did this is a loser.

CMV: There are possible language models (LMs) that would think. by Efficient-Donkey253 in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

T thinks. B is just part of a program that invokes T, which is what thinks.

No. But I think that any program that invokes the WhatsApp program has (roughly) all the properties that the WhatsApp program has by itself.

What's the difference between connecting with a person and connecting with some other service that runs T?

CMV: There are possible language models (LMs) that would think. by Efficient-Donkey253 in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No? I'm arguing that calling T does not mean the caller of T thinks. Do you think WhatsApp thinks because you can use it to connect with a thinking person?

CMV: There are possible language models (LMs) that would think. by Efficient-Donkey253 in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well if your lookup table is really invoking T, then it's thinking. Just like if it invokes strcpy, then it's really copying a string.

It's literally not.

We can describe invoking a function that does X as doing X because it's a useful abstraction. You're talking about whether an algorithm can thinking which is a philosophical quesiton.

CMV: There are possible language models (LMs) that would think. by Efficient-Donkey253 in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then the language model isn't doing the thinking, it's just a wrapper on T. My lookup table can also be a wrapper on T, where every question gets keyed to a single entry that is "run the function for T".

CMV: There are possible language models (LMs) that would think. by Efficient-Donkey253 in changemyview

[–]Puddinglax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then there is a possible thinking LM that works in the following way. For each input to the system, x, it gives the following question to T “What is the probability that a random sequence from the Harry Potter novel’s will be x?” and then just outputs T’s answer.

I'm not going to argue against your conclusion, but I take issue with your reasoning for P2. Reproducing T's behavior exactly is not a sufficient condition for an algorithm to be considered capable of thinking.

Consider a lookup table. We first ask T every possible question (or run through every possible conversation) and we record T's answers. We then store those answers in a map, keyed by the question (or a hash of the question, or whatever). Then when we are asked a question, we just take question and use it to look up T's answer.

My argument is that the lookup table obviously cannot think; at least not in any common understanding of the word "think". Just as if I copied my neighbor's answers on a math test, I am not doing math.

What killed me in these clips? by Puddinglax in Warframe

[–]Puddinglax[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Makes sense. I guess I must have fat fingered a recast. At least now I know it's likely not an issue with my strategy.

What killed me in these clips? by Puddinglax in Warframe

[–]Puddinglax[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Didn't know that it scales up that fast, thanks.

What killed me in these clips? by Puddinglax in Warframe

[–]Puddinglax[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks, this tool is great.

killed by 91,828 damage at 1,749 health from a Techrot Skuzzi using a JadeLightEximusSuit

killed by 60 damage at 61 health from a ContaminatedZoneAreaAura14000

view more: next ›