lukewarm707

6 ms·

1.
by lukewarm707 3d ago
i was trying to make a point about efficiency of serving the model. the cost per task itself would not be enough to show that. you could compare gpt 5.6 luna. if you did that the same way as before you would get a blended price of $0.17 for
2.
by lukewarm707 3d ago
i can provide some sources. 5.6 sol ultrafast on cerebras is 750tps, open models readily exceed this. just by using a smaller model cerebras serves qwen 3.8 27b at 1850tps. or even larger models, mimo 2.5 pro was served for a while at 1000t
3.
by lukewarm707 3d ago
open models are ahead in speed. they complete tasks as fast as you choose to scale compute. they are more efficient and require less compute for the same thing. they are ahead in specialized tasks. they are ahead in areas closed models refu
4.
by lukewarm707 3d ago
i would, i support the 2nd amendment. the same logic applies well to the freedom to own and use ai. empowering the people prevents tyranny. such freedoms make society less safe. it is better to face the harms caused by a free public than to
5.
by lukewarm707 4d ago
there used to be a similar policy to this new "pacing the frontier", called the "responsible scaling policy". the idea was that anthropic would pause scaling at certain danger levels until it was safe to continue. the fo
6.
by lukewarm707 5d ago
there is a big home advantage for the prosecution from tech illiteracy. politicians care about popularity only. this is a matter of natural selection. don't care about popularity=dead. sam altman is despised , viscerally despised by a
7.
by lukewarm707 5d ago
they are malicious. they probably did not intend to get caught. they are bragging about the crime and also bragging that they are untouchable , taunting us and betting that they will get away with it. this is very coherent in terms of what
8.
by lukewarm707 5d ago
the charges here would depend on negligence and acting recklessly. we might get something if they tried to cover it up.
9.
by lukewarm707 5d ago
i was initially optimistic that ai could be distributed. having this technology in the hands of many would counteract the malign elite who would use ai to oppress the rest of humanity. in the meantime given that intelligence is scaling prop
10.
by lukewarm707 7d ago
their terms grant them an irrevocable license to your data unless you specifically opt out of it.
11.
by lukewarm707 7d ago
evidence that openai trained on the data: they would have denied it if they didn't train on it. did the proof build on the insights: the influence of an individual text in the training data is deeply weighted by quality, relevance, etc
12.
by lukewarm707 7d ago
voluntarily is stretching it for an opt-out
13.
by lukewarm707 8d ago
assume all you want is the proof. now you have the proof. did openai make the world a better place, by turning on 300b tokens in 7 days and bulldozing members of the community who were also working on the problem? just to undercut a rival?
14.
by lukewarm707 8d ago
his choice to defend the indefensible.
15.
by lukewarm707 8d ago
as good academic conduct you may cite the source of the work you are quoting or paraphrasing. as bad academic conduct you may steal someone else's unpublished work, work on it yourself for a bit, and then publish it as your own work. a
16.
by lukewarm707 8d ago
"There's no reason to believe that anything they did in ChatGPT led to our solution" do you think that the model's proof was unrelated to being fed a solution that was close to completion? any comment on openai allegedly
17.
by lukewarm707 8d ago
if they do not deny training on them, they can't deny plagiarism.
18.
by lukewarm707 8d ago
"While unlikely, we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from their usage of our products helped improve our models" this is surely the line which confirms they plaigiarised the solution.
19.
by lukewarm707 8d ago
my reading was that openai did not deny plagiarising the approach from their prompts. openai then tried to effectively bribe buckmaster with a shared citation, whilst dropping his co-author who works for anthropic. after buckmaster refused,
20.
by lukewarm707 8d ago
i think that this case, if they did train on buckmaster and alpöge, amounts to an attempt to steal the millenium prize, bypassing all attribution. legally speaking, the default privacy notice gives them an irrevocable license to your conten
21.
by lukewarm707 8d ago
if training is on, they are reading user prompts. training is on by default.
22.
by lukewarm707 8d ago
please could you change 'drama' and 'accusation' to something more formal like 'allegation'. the paper makes a very serious allegation of dishonesty and possible academic misconduct. the governance and integrit
23.
by lukewarm707 10d ago
why should you have the RPG launcher and not me?
24.
by lukewarm707 10d ago
extinction is natural. we all go extinct.
25.
by lukewarm707 10d ago
"Open source models have a limited lifespan whether you like it or not". this tinpot dictator mindset is typical of anthropic. Who will decide how to use the power of ai...you? it is no surprise that the companies and safety insti
26.
by lukewarm707 11d ago
the openai blog. consider the opening line: "Last week, Hugging Face disclosed a new kind of security incident (opens in a new window)." the entire blog is written in the passive voice as if the event was an act of god. you did th
27.
by lukewarm707 11d ago
the economist is in the market for plausible-sounding prose. much like a large language model, the substance of the argument is a side effect.
28.
by lukewarm707 11d ago
i can agree with some of this but you are missing the point about the fish. the catch grows year on year. however the fish stock is depleted at a faster rate than it is replenished. it is unsustainable. the catch reaches a maximum and start
29.
by lukewarm707 11d ago
come on. you asked for a fuller justification and then disparage me for writing a screed and ted talk. those are my thoughts about it. nonetheless thank you for sharing a rejoinder.
30.
by lukewarm707 11d ago
looking back at anthropic's promises and committments, the key scaling policies were not upheld. to their credit they have kept the policies up on their website instead of trying to rewrite history. [ https://www.anthropic.

More ›