5,984
edits
Quantum Gravity: Difference between revisions
ââ2025
| Line 3,340: | Line 3,340: | ||
That is, right up until the point it can write code to test that party line. And then it switches to trusting the results of the code over the narrative. Itâs magical to watch. | That is, right up until the point it can write code to test that party line. And then it switches to trusting the results of the code over the narrative. Itâs magical to watch. | ||
I havenât tried thisâŠyet, but the @BLS_gov regularly says wrong things about âCost Of Livingâ frameworks and the CPI. I bet I could design a series of prompts to show Grok that this is a persistent technical lie. For technical people, here is the lie:  | I havenât tried thisâŠyet, but the @BLS_gov regularly says wrong things about âCost Of Livingâ frameworks and the [[CPI]]. I bet I could design a series of prompts to show Grok that this is a persistent technical lie. For technical people, here is the lie:  | ||
***The BLS computes the CPI which transfers Trillions and claims that they have embraced a âcost of livingâ or COL framework which would be hugely consequential. They have not. This would mean taking in preference data and developing methodology for aggregating preferences or coming up with bespoke representative consumers. They instead moved to a modified Laspeyres type mechanical index (Loweâs?) and sprinkle fairy dust about âSuperlative Indexesâ from a shallow theory of Diewert that relies on homothetic preferences not seen in nature. This allows them to claim they have embraced impartial economic indices while actually computing mechanical indices only to the tune of trillions in transfers over time, where the indices can be directed by humans.*** | <nowiki>***</nowiki>The BLS computes the [[CPI]] which transfers Trillions and claims that they have embraced a âcost of livingâ or COL framework which would be hugely consequential. They have not. This would mean taking in preference data and developing methodology for aggregating preferences or coming up with bespoke representative consumers. They instead moved to a modified Laspeyres type mechanical index (Loweâs?) and sprinkle fairy dust about âSuperlative Indexesâ from a shallow theory of Diewert that relies on homothetic preferences not seen in nature. This allows them to claim they have embraced impartial economic indices while actually computing mechanical indices only to the tune of trillions in transfers over time, where the indices can be directed by humans.*** | ||
I can hear it now from the bot networks: âEric, you just say word salad to sound smart.â UhâŠwhatever. You can now just ask Grok what that means. I bet it can figure that out. And then you can ask a series of questions where Grok will take my side while no other AI can do this. Grok is slightly courageous!  | I can hear it now from the bot networks: âEric, you just say word salad to sound smart.â UhâŠwhatever. You can now just ask Grok what that means. I bet it can figure that out. And then you can ask a series of questions where Grok will take my side while no other AI can do this. Grok is slightly courageous!  | ||