Last5Digits

7 ms·

1.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
The fact that you refuse to engage with my points tells me otherwise. You're drawing meaningless distinctions, anyone who has ever used Cyc will tell you that it makes massive mistakes and spits out incorrect information all the time.
2.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
Understanding comes in many forms. My uncle will not be able to model the fuel flow in his car's engine using the Navier–Stokes equations, yet he can still drive better than me. When it comes to LLMs, an understanding of the transforme
3.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
At this point, I strongly urge you to think about what could possibly change your mind. Because if you can't think of anything, then that means that this opinion is not founded on reasoning. The text LLMs produce is not just plausible
4.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
What's your definition of "correct" then? If a system is "accidentally correct" the majority of the time, when does it stop becoming "accidental"? You cannot trust any system in the way you want to define
5.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
Why do you feel the need to arbitrarily ascribe some ideology to random people based on one comment? I'm not "techno-utopian" in any sense of the word; I believe that the current AI development is highly risky and that we nee
6.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
No, the answers aren't just "plausible", they are correct the vast majority of the time. You can try this for yourself or look at any benchmark, leaderboard or even just listen to the millions of people using them every day.
7.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
Are you going to spam this same link in every single thread about LLMs on HN? People have provided good arguments refuting whatever you're trying to say here, but you just keep posting the same thing while not engaging with anyone.
8.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
The point was that for many tasks, AI has similar failure rates compared to humans while being significantly cheaper. The ability for human error rates to be reduced by spending even more money just isn't all that relevant. Even if you
9.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
A system of checks and balances also costs orders of magnitude more money.
10.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
Exactly, we need a much more granular approach to evaluating intelligence and generality. Our current conception of intelligence largely works because humans share evolutionary history and partake in the same 10+ years of standardized train
11.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
There is a difference between poor reasoning and no reasoning. SOTA LLMs correctly answer a significant number of these questions correctly. The likelihood of doing so without reasoning is astronomically small. Reasoning in general is not a
12.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
They don't. Which you can easily check with any of the dozen web apps currently implementing the GPT-4o tokenizer.
13.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
Here's hoping that the average HN commenter will actually read the paper and realize that the study was performed using GPT-3.5.
14.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
I honestly don't think it is a matter of opinion, though. Her voice has a few very distinct characteristics, the most significant of which being the vocal fry / huskiness, that aren't present at all in either of the Sky model
15.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
That's not the purpose though, clearly. If anything, you could make the argument that they're trading in on the association to the movie "Her", that's it. Neither Sky nor the new voice model sound particularly like
16.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
Apologies from me as well. I've been unnecessarily aggressive in my comments. Seeing very uninformed but smug takes on AI here over the last year has made me very wary of interactions like this, but you've been very calm in your r
17.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
You consistently refuse to take the necessary reasoning steps yourself. If your next reply also requires me to lead you every single millimeter to the conclusion you should have reached on your own, then I won't reply again. First of a
18.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
No, think about it. The granularity of the interface (the tokenizer) is the problem, the actual model could count just fine. If the legally blind person never had had good vision or corrective instruments, had never been told that their vis
19.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
Please try to actually understand what og_kalu is saying instead of being obtuse about something any grade-schooler intuitively grasps. Imagine a legally blind person, they can barely see anything; just general shapes flowing into one anoth
20.
by Last5Digits 2y ago
Your English is absolutely fine and your answers in this thread clearly addressed the points brought up by other commenters. I have no idea what that guy is on about.
21.
by Last5Digits 3y ago
I never made the claim that there were no solutions to the problems outlined above. In fact, I implemented exactly what you've linked long ago. This doesn't, of course, change the fact that no such easy procedure exists on unroote
22.
by Last5Digits 3y ago
I mean sure, I could solve the issue with a better strategy, but what bugs me is that this is a problem in the first place. Should accurate time really still be an issue in 2024?
23.
by Last5Digits 3y ago
I only have access to Android devices, so my claim likely won't extend to Apple. In fact, I've been told by a friend that Apple watches do in fact use the GPS signal to sync the clock. But as far as I know, they are the only ones
24.
by Last5Digits 3y ago
While I apologize for making general claims without a significantly larger sample size, I have tried this on all of my devices and those of family and friends. I only have access to phones running Android and laptops/desktops running W
25.
Ask HN: Why are modern devices so terrible at accurate timekeeping?
6 points by Last5Digits 3y ago|13 comments
26.
by Last5Digits 3y ago
Thanks for this bit of sanity. I was losing my mind trying to think up an explanation as to why that comment wasn't flagged or inundated with comments pointing out the sheer stupidity and inhumane arrogance. I don't want to be ove
27.
by Last5Digits 3y ago
Somewhat off topic, but thank you for putting into code what has been floating around in my imagination since high school. I haven't tested your project yet, but I really do hope that AI assisted roleplaying becomes a mainstay in the g
28.
by Last5Digits 3y ago
Be aware that you're talking about Quora's implementation of ChatGPT here. As far as I know, the cached answers were generated with an incredibly outdated version, which is definitely not indicative of its current quality. Even wo
29.
by Last5Digits 3y ago
The issue I have with your comments is that you make some reasonable points, and then immediately over-extrapolate these points unreasonably. >I think LLMs are a good start. I am certain they lack a world model, the kind you and me use.
30.
by Last5Digits 3y ago
> The model F=GMm/r^2, for example, has a causal and ontological semantics: F is a force, M a mass etc. these are pieces of reality. And this formula (though actual a little suspicious in many ways, GR fixes this) nevertheless says

More ›