angoragoats

6 ms·

1.
by angoragoats 4d ago
Ah, I see you're still misunderstanding what I say. If you'd like to come back and actually engage with what I'm saying, ask for clarifications, or answer the hypothetical I posed, I'd welcome it! Have a good one.
2.
by angoragoats 4d ago
I do not agree to disagree, since I think your responses were either incorrect or not addressing my argument at all, but since you're not even attempting to engage anymore I'm happy to move on.
3.
by angoragoats 4d ago
> This language has been used in this way for 70 years. These are the words that are used to discuss these things. Are you suggesting this plan has been in the works for 70 years? No, I am stating that the term “machine learning” as used
4.
by angoragoats 4d ago
This statement as written is false. If you disagree, please show me where Massachusetts has a free ID card available to anyone who wants it. The only people in MA who can get a free ID are the homeless. Yes, MA has other options for proving
5.
by angoragoats 4d ago
> You are ascribing intent where you have no evidence or proof As I said already, the evidence is in the language they use, unless you think that OpenAI employees are dumb enough to genuinely believe that an LLM is “thinking.” (By the wa
6.
by angoragoats 4d ago
I am not arguing that any of these terms are novel, so this doesn’t address my argument. Even if I agree that LLM makers are using these terms in the way they were originally defined (which I don’t), my point is that they’re specifically be
7.
by angoragoats 5d ago
Jail time for executives and nothing less.
8.
by angoragoats 5d ago
Yes, it is, for the reasons I stated in my comment, and you only need look at any OAI/Anthropic press release to see evidence of this in the language they use. The LLM now reasons better! Set the thinking level! It learns! All of these
9.
by angoragoats 5d ago
I don’t think plausible deniability works this way; the black box is still controlled by them and therefore still their responsibility. They are still liable for its actions and the OAI board should be charged with a felony/felonies fo
10.
by angoragoats 5d ago
One of the main purposes of LLMs is to launder responsibility/culpability for (possibly nefarious) actions in the eyes of the public. The average person has no idea how LLMs actually work and think it’s plausible that an “agent” could
11.
by angoragoats 5d ago
Sam Altman and the rest of the OAI board should be charged with violating the CFAA for this action.
12.
by angoragoats 6d ago
Thanks for checking! I don't use products from any of these companies, with two exceptions: I use Stripe as a consumer when I need to buy something on a site which uses them for their payment processing, and I use Cloudflare as a consu
13.
by angoragoats 7d ago
Well, time to find a new VPS/DNS provider, I guess…
14.
by angoragoats 7d ago
Yes, exactly this. Externally, I have absolutely zero evidence that anything this person describes will come to pass, and I do have evidence that LLMs are not capable of many of the things that he mentions. So this seems like perhaps this p
15.
by angoragoats 7d ago
A self-sustaining reaction is exactly what happens with the fissionable material inside the nuclear weapon[0]. It seems like you’re trying to be pedantic on terminology here, but if you’re saying that a self-sustaining reaction is as un-sci
16.
by angoragoats 8d ago
> Our paper shows that the current way that we focus on removing biases from models is not enough. We do this by showing how LLMs can develop new previously unseen biases for demographic groups, even when there are no differences between
17.
by angoragoats 10d ago
"I don't know what all those sources that describe specific instances of Twitter restricting free speech are about, but my vibes tell me that the other platforms restrict free speech."
18.
by angoragoats 10d ago
What’s a super Nazi? It is a fact that Musk is a Nazi. If someone publicly gives a Nazi salute and publicly endorses trash like the great replacement theory, I’m going to call them a Nazi, because that’s what they are. If other CEOs say sim
19.
by angoragoats 10d ago
1. This definition is so broad as to be practically useless. One could argue that LLMs of several years ago met these criteria, or that conversely we haven’t come close to meeting them. 2. I thought you were saying the resources that the LL
20.
by angoragoats 10d ago
1. What is “AGI” and why is it a “dangerous technology”? 2. Why would there be competition for resources, assuming there are enough resources for the “AGI” to run in the first place? This seems like a far-fetched hypothetical raised in serv
21.
by angoragoats 10d ago
This is a bad essay, or rather it’s a marketing fluff piece; it’s certainly not any kind of policy paper, research paper, or even an essay. I am concerned that we (meaning, we in the tech industry) tend to take this type of writing for more
22.
by angoragoats 10d ago
What a load of BS. Here’s one of many provably false claims in this fluff piece: “And, in line with Ray Kurzweil’s predictions from the end of the XXth century , we now find ourselves at the moment in history of computing where machine inte
23.
by angoragoats 11d ago
> Many people are in fact claiming the thing you are saying they are not - even if you are not. My original comment said “no one here.” Please show me where someone in the comments here is claiming that. > Why the desperation to hang
24.
by angoragoats 11d ago
My point is that “it doesn’t check the accuracy of the prediction against the data” is a non-response, because no one calling it a “next-token predictor” is making the claim that it does do that or that they’re calling it a next-token predi
25.
by angoragoats 12d ago
> It doesn't check a "prediction" against what was actually "next" in data Literally no one here is claiming that it does. This is one of the many flaws in the article.
26.
by angoragoats 12d ago
Not the person you’re replying to, but I read the whole article as an admission that it’s still a next-token predictor. More specifically: what does RLVR fundamentally change that somehow makes the whole process no longer a next-token predi
27.
by angoragoats 12d ago
Even if I agree with you that the "average person" meets the 3 specific criteria you list (which I don't), I don't believe the claim that the typical security training includes specific instruction in how TLDs and domain
28.
by angoragoats 12d ago
Yes, you're right, thank you for the correction.
29.
by angoragoats 13d ago
The average person doesn’t have the foggiest idea how TLDs, DNS, or domain registration work at all. The only people who will make the assumptions you state are people who are tech-savvy enough to be familiar with those concepts, but not we
30.
by angoragoats 13d ago
I'm not sure I understand. How is registering first.last.name not also selecting one name ("first") that precedes last.name, similar to how you register one name that precedes .com? (And yes, I am aware that you can also regi

More ›