LeroyRaz

5 ms·

1.
by LeroyRaz 5mo ago
This reads like something AI generated...
2.
by LeroyRaz 9mo ago
Examples: tptacek gets an 'A' for his comment on DF which the LLM claiming that the user "captured DF's unforgiving nature, where 'can't do x or it crashes is just another feature to learn' which remained
3.
by LeroyRaz 9mo ago
I am surprised the author thought the project passed quality control. The LLM reviews seem mostly false. Looking at the comment reviews on the actual website, the LLM seems to have mostly judged whether it agreed with the takes, not whether
4.
by LeroyRaz 10mo ago
Hacker News readers, and especially commenters, are number 1!
5.
by LeroyRaz 10mo ago
Have you read the literature? Do you have a background in machine learning or statistics? Yes. We know that LLMs can be trained by predicting the next token. This is a fact. You can look up the research papers, and open source training code
6.
by LeroyRaz 10mo ago
I mean, yeah, statistics works. It's not that surprising that super amazing statistical modelling can approximate a distribution. Of course, thoughts, words, arguments are distributions, and with a powerful enough model you can simulat
7.
by LeroyRaz 10mo ago
I'm not sure what you mean? Saying we understand the training process of LLMs does not mean that LLMs are not super impressive. They are shining testiments to the power of statistical modelling / machine learning. Arbitrarily recl
8.
by LeroyRaz 10mo ago
I think the person you are responding to is using a strange definition of "know." I think they mean "do we understand how they process information to produce their outputs" (i.e., do we have an analytical description of
9.
by LeroyRaz 10mo ago
What do you mean? what do you think statistical modelling is? I am very confused by your stance. The aim of the function approximation is to maximize the likelihood of the observed data (this is standard statistical modelling), using machin
10.
by LeroyRaz 10mo ago
How is that a misconception? LLMs are just advanced statistical modelling (unsupervised machine learning) with small tweaks (e.g., some fine-tuning for human preference). At the core, they are just statistical modelling. The fact that stati
11.
by LeroyRaz 10mo ago
You realize that they will gladly hallucinate science... You should check the papers it claims to reference as see if the claims it makes are actually backed up. In my experience, it can completely mischaracterize scientific literature. For
12.
by LeroyRaz 10mo ago
I don't think things get better over time. What is your source for that? Here's an article (with sources) describing a massive down trend in literacy and reading comprehension: https://jmarriott.substack.com/p&#x2F
13.
by LeroyRaz 10mo ago
Be careful. The models easily hallucinate problems and misdiagnose. For example, I had an issue with some GPU code, and it assured me, with utter conviction that my problem was caused by some subtle race condition ('a known issue'
14.
by LeroyRaz 11mo ago
You make a completely false equvilance. A car person would be some kind of car person hybrid if you read it literally. Car person is acting as a short hand for "Car obsessed person." Car is a noun, blind is an adjective, etc...
15.
by LeroyRaz 11mo ago
There's no such thing as capitalism without government. Depending on how the government regulates capitalism, you don't necessarily get wealth inequality.
16.
by LeroyRaz 11mo ago
To take the example of trans: yes. Multiple different groups have genuine concerns about trans issues. For example, you have trans people wanting to be respected and not victimized, you have women who fear men being in their spaces, you hav
17.
by LeroyRaz 11mo ago
Chat Control seems unabashedly evil.
18.
by LeroyRaz 11mo ago
This particular type of authoritarianism is primarily from the left in the west. The EU, the UK, Canada, it is the political left implementing these policies, often using them to censor right wing views (e.g., Objecting to immigration gets
19.
by LeroyRaz 11mo ago
Intolerance is the wrong framing. You should be understanding. People who throw the label "bigot" around are themselves bigots (convinced of the superiority of their own beliefs without engaging with others views). A lot of people
20.
by LeroyRaz 11mo ago
I don't understand how the removing of right wing users is described as a necessary good to create a safe and inclusive space, while the removal of left wing users is decried as censorship. If you dismiss people who have genuine concer
21.
by LeroyRaz 1y ago
Maybe I haven't worked on tricky enough problems, but I swear people massively hype-up the difficulty of coding. The vast majority of the time there is little difficult problem solving
22.
by LeroyRaz 1y ago
It confused me sufficiently that I consulted the original paper to check what type of AI algorithm the research used! That was my immediate reaction to reading the sentence. Out of curiosity, are you familiar with work like "the AI Sci
23.
by LeroyRaz 1y ago
There are two ways to interpret the sentence we are discussing: A: a grammatically incorrect statement, saying that "the AI used theory", when they mean that "the AI's design can be understood using theory" (or mo
24.
by LeroyRaz 1y ago
What makes it clear to you that they don't mean what they explicitly write? What are you defending and why? Philosophical discussions aside, it is entirely possible for current AI to use concepts (but the research they are describing d
25.
by LeroyRaz 1y ago
They write the "AI was probably using some esoteric theoretical principles." That is a direct quote of the article. If it was an LLM based model this could be a correct statement, and it would suggest a groundbreaking achievemen
26.
by LeroyRaz 1y ago
The standard term is Machine Learning (ML). It's not artificial intelligence (AI) because there is no sense of attempting to manipulate concepts (e.g., the classic symbolic conceptual manipulation algorithms, or modern foundation model
27.
by LeroyRaz 1y ago
The article is misleading and badly written. None of the mentioned works seem to have used language or knowledge based models. It looks like all the results were driven by optimization algorithms, and yet the writing describes AI 'usin
28.
by LeroyRaz 1y ago
Isn't the writer themselves using the "insipid bullet points with bold style"?
29.
by LeroyRaz 1y ago
TikTok is a legitimate national security concern.
30.
by LeroyRaz 2y ago
Money Extraction: fighting over a slice of pie. Wealth Creation: creating new pie. In practice, a lot of things that look extractive (e.g., designing better high frequency trading algorithms) potentially have some marginal utility (e.g., cr

More ›