froobius

6 ms·

1.
by froobius 6d ago
> context a session moves grows with roughly the square of its length Readme doesn't mention that LLM providers do context caching — your costs aren't quadratic unless you frequently invalidate the cache.
2.
by froobius 1mo ago
I'm starting to wonder if any of this is better than local newspapers, where there's an editor with oversight over all content...
3.
by froobius 2mo ago
You can run a lot of these on e.g. M1 max 64gb
4.
by froobius 3mo ago
Erm that's higher than the healthy BMI range, so not "fairly light". >25 is considered overweight.
5.
by froobius 6mo ago
On the other hand, taking backwards compatibility so seriously is a big part of the massive success of Python
6.
by froobius 6mo ago
It's very clear that the consumer is getting a worse experience than what is technically possible. There is no good phone-slash-laptop, purely because it's less profitable than locking down the devices and selling them separately.
7.
by froobius 10mo ago
I couldn't see any citations or references in that video or its description. It presents it as him solving the problem himself, but I'm sure other people have written about solving the Game of Life in reverse with SAT solvers prio
8.
by froobius 10mo ago
And the news just now is that the chair of the OBR has resigned because of this [1] [1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cly147rky81t
9.
by froobius 10mo ago
Hmm it can capture more than just single words though, e.g. meaningful phrases or paragraphs that could be written in many ways.
10.
by froobius 10mo ago
> There isn't an idea that "IQ is some innate fixed quality" Actually yes there is; I have come across many people who believe this, specifically saying that IQ is fixed. > that intelligence is an innate fixed quality I
11.
by froobius 10mo ago
See also: "Major IQ differences in identical twins linked to schooling, challenging decades of research" [1] [2] I.e. the idea that IQ is some innate fixed quality has evidence against it. It seems obvious that this is the case, g
12.
by froobius 11mo ago
> Any leakiness in BackProp is addressed by researchers who introduce new optimizers > As a developer, you just pick the best one and find good hparams for it It would be more correct to say: "As a developer, (not researcher), wh
13.
by froobius 11mo ago
YouTube has so much questionable content on it that gets millions of views... Parents who've found ways to monetize their kids. Dangerous / unpleasant pranks being pulled on members the public. Conspiracy theories. Fake game shows
14.
by froobius 11mo ago
Stuff like this feels like some company has managed to monetize an open source object detection model like YOLO [1], creating something that could be cobbled together relatively easily, and then sold it as advance AI capabilities. (You&#x27
15.
by froobius 11mo ago
I agree, the post above you is patently wrong / hasn't read the paper they are dismissing. I also got multiple downvotes for disagreeing, with no actual rebuttal.
16.
by froobius 11mo ago
I think the main thing to clarify is: It's not a uniform distribution after the first measurement, t_obs. That enables us to update the distribution, and it becomes a decaying one. I think you mistakenly believe the distribution is sti
17.
by froobius 11mo ago
> Model state is present only in so-far-generated text Wrong. There's "model state", (I assume you mean hidden layers), not just in the generated text, but also in the initial prompt given to the model. I.e. the model can
18.
by froobius 11mo ago
Ah no, it is the Copernican principle, in mathematical form.
19.
by froobius 11mo ago
Yes that's pretty much it. There will be a decaying probability curve, because given you could fail at any time, you are less likely to survive for N units of time than for just 1 unit of time, etc.
20.
by froobius 11mo ago
(Just to expand on that, it's true not just the for the first token. There's a lot of computation, including potentially planning ahead, before each token outputted.) That's why saying "it's just predicting the next
21.
by froobius 11mo ago
That's a paradox that comes from getting ideas mixed up. The most likely time to fail is always "right now", i.e. this is the part of the curve with the greatest height. However, the average expected future lifetime increases
22.
by froobius 11mo ago
That's inverted, it would be: If: P(1 more minute | 1 minute so far) = x Then: P(1 more minute | 2 minutes so far) > x The curve is: P(survival) = t_obs / (t_obs + t_more) (t_obs is time observed to have survived, t_more how lo
23.
by froobius 11mo ago
> while this Copernican principle sounds very deep and insightful, it is actually just a pretty trite mathematical observation It's important to flag that the principle is not trite, and it is useful. There's been a misunderst
24.
by froobius 11mo ago
Ah, that's not correct... That explains why you think it's "trite", (which it isn't). The distribution is uniform before you get the measurement of time taken already. But once you get that measurement, it's no
25.
by froobius 11mo ago
You've added some useful context, but I think you're downplaying it's use. It's non-obvious, and in many cases better than just saying "we don't know". For example, if some company's server has been d
26.
by froobius 11mo ago
I'm not sure about that. Is it not sometimes useful for decision making, when you don't have any insight as to how long a thing will be? It's better than just saying "I don't know".
27.
by froobius 11mo ago
Yes, with no prior knowledge the mathematically correct estimate is: time left = time so far But as you note prior knowledge will enable a better guess.
28.
by froobius 11mo ago
So if you say something is an anecdote, then that anecdote is immune to any discussion or analysis? How about the idea that some anecdotes are better than others. E.g. "Anecdotal, but I took paracetamol and found it wasn't helpful
29.
by froobius 11mo ago
Sure, I don't disagree with that. Although, in addition to labelling something as an anecdote, it's also useful to flag the confounding factors.
30.
by froobius 11mo ago
Yes but some anecdotes are closer to evidence than others. And people seem to be treating the above anecdote like it is evidence. Which we both agree it isn't. It isn't convincing given the time frame / lack of comparison.

More ›