beyarkay

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by beyarkay 23d ago

   > it is about attacking ... via its http interface Say more? HTTP isn't mentioned in the article. The article talks about bugs in the parser that ingests token sequences.
2. 2.▲
   by beyarkay 9mo ago

   It says a lot that you didn't read 90% of a 2 minute essay
3. 3.▲
   by beyarkay 9mo ago

   very cool
4. 4.▲
   Lawyers are uniquely well-placed to resist AI job automation(boydkane.com)

   3 points by beyarkay 9mo ago|4 comments
5. 5.▲
   by beyarkay 11mo ago

   well said, yes this is the point I was (apparently failing) to make
6. 6.▲
   by beyarkay 11mo ago

   well, yes, exactly. I'm not trying to claim that old code is more reliable just because it was written a long time ago, I'm making the claim that old code is more reliable because of the survivorship bias. If code was first writ
7. 7.▲
   by beyarkay 11mo ago

   correct.
8. 8.▲
   by beyarkay 11mo ago

   Yes this is what I was trying to say. Code that's been in production for 20 years has less bugs than code that's been around for 20 minutes
9. 9.▲
   by beyarkay 11mo ago

   ah yes, one person understands the point I was trying to make (:
10. 10.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    I was maybe a little unclear with the phrasing, I meant to say "software that's been around for 20 years is more reliable than software that's been around for 2 months"
11. 11.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    Yeah this is my mistake, the phrase "can't you just turn it off" was in several drafts but got edited out, and I missed that during the publishing of the essay.
12. 12.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    Why did you think it a parody?
13. 13.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    > He is trying to lax the general public perception around AIs shortcomings This is not at all what I'm trying to do. This same essay is cross-posted on LessWrong[1] because I think ASI is the most dangerous problem of our time. &gt
14. 14.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    Say more? I stand by my statement, but you're not specific enough for me to explain why I believe I'm correct.
15. 15.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    > Ok, I'm starting to feel this is a troll post. This guy can't be serious. Did you read the footnote about writing regression tests to catch bugs before they come back in production?
16. 16.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    Bless you for having reading comprehension
17. 17.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    consider it consulted! Autodiscovery should work when I publish changes (in a few hours)
18. 18.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    Thanks for bringing that to my attention, I think I fixed the feed to include everything? By default quartz only does 10 posts.
19. 19.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    Thanks! I don't use RSS, but I believe https://boydkane.com/index.xml should work? I recently updated it to show all posts (not just the most recent 10) so it should be better now (I hope).
20. 20.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    Thanks, I appreciate the positive feedback.
21. 21.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    See the note for technical folk[1], I'm referring to 2025 frontier large language models. [1]: https://boydkane.com/essays/boss#user-content-fn-7
22. 22.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    Woah, I didn't realise NLP was still a field, but cool that they're working on interpretability now!
23. 23.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    > Is it just talking about the ML foundations, not applications? Yes, actually. I care about the foundations, the application get rewritten or made obsolete every time a new foundational LLM gets released.
24. 24.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    > Do you have to read everything in a dataset with your own eyes to make sense of it? I mean, if you don't read it yourself, you're going to have to rely on _something/someone_ to filter/summarise the output, and at t
25. 25.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    I appreciate the humility (:
26. 26.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    > The capabilities of ChatGPT are known. It generates text and images There's a big difference between generating text which does someone's homework and text which changes peoples opinion about the world (e.g. the r/change
27. 27.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    I think you misunderstood my post? I'm comparing AI as a system vs written code as a system. Both systems can have flaws, but the way in which they fail is different. The danger comes when non-technical people try to apply intuitions a
28. 28.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    > vulnerabilities are caused by lack of experience In the limit, everyone has a lack of experience (compared to their future selves). This sentence proves too much ( https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/13/pro
29. 29.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    The MoEs are not interpretable, there is no "coding expert" and "maths expert". They are specialised, but not in a way that humans understand.
30. 30.▲
    by beyarkay 11mo ago

    Ah, that was you! Thanks, I actually prefer the current title.