greggoB

6 ms·

1.
by greggoB 4d ago
Weirdly, I've experienced a notable uptick in Graphene-related posts over the last couple of weeks. So is the flagging not hiding the posts for me (and those I've seen comment on them), or are there many other posts I'm not s
2.
by greggoB 6d ago
> API or consumer subscription It's not given in the statement, so I don't know > And did he share drafts of the work with anyone who fed it back in on a consumer subscription without disabling training? To this, the statem
3.
by greggoB 7d ago
It's in this statement he released (linked in the article) [0]: "I pay for the tools my group uses out of my own research funds, including footing a large bill to OpenAI." [0] https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb&#x
4.
by greggoB 7d ago
If you read Buckmasters statement, he specifically notes that they used the paid subscriptions, iirc.
5.
by greggoB 8d ago
> Human behaviour on the average will choose convenience over effort. That's pretty much my take on it, yeah.
6.
by greggoB 8d ago
Seems like exactly the kind of distinction that would be a common refrain on HN, yet somehow on this topic it's gone out the window. > A simple example: with picture editing software Actually reminds me of a story a professor in a c
7.
by greggoB 8d ago
Really sorry to hear so. Your story reinforces a fear I have that humanity is being squeezed out of all manner of things (pre AI too, but even more so since).
8.
by greggoB 8d ago
> but we are ready to throw the problem at AI agents right away I'm not sure I understand this correctly, but I assume it means blaming the agents? If so, that's not my point - I'm describing how many people are using them
9.
by greggoB 8d ago
> With AI the solution to it is also trivial since an extra three seconds spent writing a prompt could have had the agent run and verify it. This just recurses the original problem by an additional step: assuming someone is even bothered
10.
by greggoB 8d ago
> If he's not the person to test, iterate, and deliver quality with AI, he probably wouldn't be without it I see the take quite often on HN, and I have a major gripe with it. Yes, people were lazy and we had these problems befo
11.
by greggoB 12d ago
Nobody is suggesting Fairphone has also replaced Google/Android re SW/OS. What they've arguably done I'd improve the existing situation - surely that counts for something ? There is also nothing precluding them from dro
12.
by greggoB 12d ago
I'm typing this from a Galaxy S10 I got in 2020, with Lineage 22 (Android 15) running on it. For sure it isn't the snappiest, but my only real performance issue is loading gifs on Signal, which takes several seconds for some reaso
13.
by greggoB 13d ago
Point taken, I was possibly overly curt in my response, leading to it being ambiguous, both re when the loss function is being minimised and that it is a stochastic process. So to OPs question: I guess LLMs do have an "idea" of wh
14.
by greggoB 13d ago
Private users also have sensitive information which, if leaked, could be used to their detriment (e.g training data getting hacked, etc). I don't see any distinction between companies and people when it comes to moral objections re tra
15.
by greggoB 14d ago
In ML, "best" is what minimises the loss function, so in a certain (very basic) sense it does.
16.
by greggoB 21d ago
> Really I have no idea what this case accomplished besides being a tax on a successful company. You forgot "evil" in your description of the company. It is supposed to realign their incentives away from massively exploiting so
17.
by greggoB 28d ago
> This appears entirely unreasonable. Seems a bit strong. Unit testing can get you some of the way, but its not a full-on all-case guarantee. Sometimes the code is encapsulating some particularly complex system/behaviour. Sometime
18.
by greggoB 29d ago
Thanks for the clarification, that makes a lot of sense!
19.
by greggoB 29d ago
I am very much weirder out by it, yeah. Seems some societies are just excessively desperate for some kind, any kind, of fuel for economic growth, to the point this is where attention is now. The term "post capitalism" being thrown
20.
by greggoB 29d ago
Does 'registration' introduce anything physically different? Or could they be completely interoperable?
21.
by greggoB 1mo ago
I got a 3060 ti for like $900 at that time <melting-face-emoji>
22.
by greggoB 1mo ago
> So... did they list the "0GB" racks with removed ram cheaper you ask? Could this be an indication that there's a supply shortage/price increase of the remaining components in the rack? Or do you interpret it as peop
23.
by greggoB 1mo ago
I believe they've been building them like crazy since covid, but it takes a looong time for them to come online (like 5-10 years?)
24.
by greggoB 1mo ago
My understanding is that it's fundamentally a fab capacity limit. At a given node size/technology (think 7nm, etc) they can only output so many wafers. If AI data centers are generating enormous demand for memory, then that's
25.
by greggoB 1mo ago
The alternative being having LLM responses be in the form of negging? Or did I not understand the reference?
26.
by greggoB 1mo ago
> As long as you are consciously aware This is a strong assumption; we know that people tend to be overly confident about their mental states. That conscious awareness will last all of two minutes for 99.9% of the population, with everyo
27.
by greggoB 1mo ago
Agreed about balance, but you lost me after that - I really struggle to see a serious concern about society over-eagerly shutting down ideas, not when we live in a world in which all manner of ideas - including those that are disruptive and
28.
by greggoB 1mo ago
Isn't AI's infinite willingness and lack of inhibition sort of the thing that people are increasingly voicing concern over? Put differently, maybe there's something fundamentally unhealthy to having a "discussion" w
29.
by greggoB 1mo ago
Yeah so this would certainly be unacceptable, especially for NYC tax-payers struggling to get by I'm sure. My point is that the article leaves open room that the situation in SF isn't necessarily only due to unscrupulous behavio
30.
by greggoB 1mo ago
That's clearly not the point - it's not a function of everyone knowing, but rather a function of the attempt to cover it up. Waving defeatism as some kind of universal truth is neither particularly enlightening nor useful.

More ›