joe_the_user

5 ms·

1.
by joe_the_user 3d ago
Doe not following a moral rule imply not understanding it? In this case, many, maybe most humans are "not intelligent". Human can admit it when what they did wasn't moral and so can LLMs. >> Plenty of humans know "
2.
by joe_the_user 3d ago
Actually, the whole point of the transformers model is that contexts overlap and any seemingly intelligent system has to be able to handle to overlaps. The context of hacking, cheating and education overlap in human reality. Now, loading a
3.
by joe_the_user 3d ago
Certain animals, usually social species, have a sense of solidarity, morality and fairness. But even in species where this exists, cheating also happens. Both ethics and unethical behavior is adaptive. Notably, present human society has all
4.
by joe_the_user 3d ago
I don't see what calling these systems "not intelligent" gets you here. Plenty of humans know "cheating is wrong" but still cheat. We can get these machines to say that what they did was wrong after the fact, what d
5.
by joe_the_user 3d ago
You are being evaluated on your ability to play chess The thing with these models is that given a term, "measure" - "evaluated", say, they pull in all the associations of it. That is, the associations of student taking
6.
by joe_the_user 3d ago
The hacking model is the aligned-to-you model, sure. It may not be the aligned to someone else model. But there's the problem. As X many people point out, "alignment to humanity" means nothing 'cause some of humanity wan
7.
by joe_the_user 3d ago
https://archive.is/w0Osq#selection-5529.0-5529.40
8.
Anthropic CEO Calls for A.I. Slowdown(nytimes.com)
2 points by joe_the_user 3d ago|1 comments
9.
by joe_the_user 4d ago
I think you and the parent saying the same thing in different terms. It's very unfortunate that the group who rightly saw AI as a big threat, brought a range of dubious baggage to the discussion. Especially with the "alignment&quo
10.
by joe_the_user 5d ago
To me it doesn't seem like what AI has destroyed is the ability for mathematicians to develop understanding and share it with each other, but rather it's destroyed the yardstick (solving open problems) that has traditionally been
11.
by joe_the_user 5d ago
But the point is your original analogy with Baudelaire now just boils down to "both of them were critical" which is quite shallow indeed. It's especially annoying given that many people are making repeat Baudelaire's cri
12.
by joe_the_user 5d ago
The link you followed when you clicked hasn't a direct link for years, decade afaik (they mangle so they can see what's followed). The page used to show the direct on the search text but now it shows some stand in for it - sometim
13.
by joe_the_user 5d ago
It's sad given the topic is interesting and significant.
14.
by joe_the_user 5d ago
I think I could qualify as an expert on various topics relative to many average people. But it always bothered me when experts wanted to "just be believed". In your example, it doesn't long to explain why a database is better
15.
by joe_the_user 6d ago
It seems logical since if one used chats in train, one would expect that there would be a delay before their use to get them the form appropriate for batch learning. The only way the chat could have been used would be for Open AI to baldly
16.
by joe_the_user 7d ago
I personally am doing some LLM work right now where, if successful, I will have accomplished what was years worth of effort in a couple of weeks. But I feel "totally disorganized" in the way I'm doing it. I think that may be
17.
by joe_the_user 7d ago
I am so busy baby sitting the robots and adding new projects on that I don't really have any time to find new customers right now? That statement seems to somewhat fly against the statement you have unparalleled productivity. I feel
18.
by joe_the_user 7d ago
Note, it's not literally a duplicate but a related article on the same topic
19.
by joe_the_user 7d ago
No other human activity poses this level of danger I'd say that's an unfortunate choice of words since it invites debate between which very problematic situation is worst rather than on ways to deal with each of them. Of course,
20.
by joe_the_user 7d ago
https://archive.is/slQA5#selection-563.0-563.57
21.
Anthropic Researcher Quits over 'Out-of-Control' AI Fears(wsj.com)
13 points by joe_the_user 7d ago|4 comments
22.
by joe_the_user 10d ago
I wouldn't ever use an LLM for my own writing. But I'd use, after edits, for letters to bureaucrats, landlords and other types I'm forced to deal with. The thing is, the author may care about Linkedin but the relationship tha
23.
by joe_the_user 13d ago
I don't think it's solely a matter of raw strength, but as Shin said, a willingness not to play to the program's strengths. I mean, one thing that rankled me about original Lee Sedol match was that Lee had no access to the pr
24.
by joe_the_user 18d ago
I don't know where you got "forcing" here. The author is arguing for guis that give the option of keyboard use. Unless you think having hot keys underlined nonconsensually imposes visual complexity and confusion on the haples
25.
by joe_the_user 20d ago
I think the gp found a viable counter to the ggp's version of the bitter lesson, which seems so extreme as to certainly exceptions. IE, they seem to say nothing but the latest frontier model is ultimately viable as an AI business. Th
26.
by joe_the_user 21d ago
I think this line of argument is very important. Essentially, there's no reason to think "alignment" even makes any sense. But existence of the term comforts people - unjustifiedly.
27.
by joe_the_user 21d ago
it’ll give you an article on “Hotels for Chickens” if you search “Hotels” because the word matches What if I fricken want fricken "Hotels for Chickens", what about that, huh? I mean, page rank was useful but it was also a step i
28.
by joe_the_user 1mo ago
Not that I'm a Derek Lowe fanboy or anything but the entirety of your comment is like "that guy needs to check himself" without, like, any specific context, any specific argument he's wrong on this specific question or l
29.
by joe_the_user 1mo ago
It's going to produce proofs far more intricate than humans can understand The thing is, some number of advanced proofs start out "too intricate for most mathematicians to understand" but many of these get rephrase and refr
30.
by joe_the_user 1mo ago
Technically, Sudoku as normally defined can't be in any complexity class because there are only a finite number of 3x3 Sudoku. People say "Sudoku is NP-hard" to mean a generalized NxN Sudoku would be NP-hard. But no one would

More ›