mmmore

11 ms·

1.
by mmmore 3mo ago
It's very hard for me to understand the frame a mind of the author of an article like this. I can't understand people seeing Anthropic's revenue go from $9B to $30B from January to April and seeing GPT 5.6(?) solve a longstan
2.
by mmmore 4mo ago
This assumes that demand is elastic and unbounded. It might be true that there's a lot of untapped demand for software, but especially considering individual firms, it's plausible that demand for their offerings might be capped. I
3.
by mmmore 4mo ago
Nope, Railway was the company who was hosting PocketOS, which is the company that blamed Cursor for deleting their prod database. Railway is only involved insofar as their API allowed an instant delete of the prod database.
4.
by mmmore 4mo ago
I don't want to be a manager, but I also don't want to be a technician (for the most part). I want to be an engineer, which means my job is to solve problems. LLMs help me solve problems faster, so I use them. Sometimes I get the
5.
by mmmore 5mo ago
> If a human driver commits vehicular manslaughter, they get the book. I wish this were true. Often they get off with a light punishment, or no punishment at all.
6.
by mmmore 5mo ago
The token prices being high for Opus undermines your argument, because it shows people are willing to pay more for the model. The thing is the new OpenAI/Anthropic models are noticeably better than open source. Open source is not unusa
7.
by mmmore 6mo ago
One hidden premise of this is "AI tools are not useful now, even if they might be in the future." For example: > Few are useful to me as they are now. Except current AI tools are extremely useful and I think you're missing
8.
by mmmore 6mo ago
Sure one of the companies paying for Linux desktop development is influencing what software gets development. Doesn't sound very nefarious to me. Red Hat, Canonical, etc. want a working and friendly Linux desktop as much as you do. The
9.
by mmmore 6mo ago
I've used Wayland (via sway) for multiple years including on machines with a 1060 and 5080 (mainly for good fractional scaling support). The only major issues I've had with it have to do with XWayland apps. I think there are some
10.
by mmmore 11mo ago
You can say that, and I might even agree, but many smart people disagree. Could you explain why you believe that? Have you read in detail the arguments of people who disagree with you?
11.
by mmmore 1y ago
Sure some of them maybe, but given that many concerned people think the chance of extinction is 10% or higher, it's not really low probability enough to be considered a Pascal's Wager.
12.
by mmmore 1y ago
I really don't think that very many people are concerned about AI because of Roko's Basilisk; that's more of a meme.
13.
by mmmore 1y ago
If you have not heard of one person worried about AIs taking over humanity, you're really not paying attention. Geoff Hinton has been warning about that since he quit Google in 2019. Yoshua Bengio has talked about it, saying we should
14.
by mmmore 1y ago
I think by most objective measures the size and power of large organizations has increased since WWII. For example, the size and scope of Western governments, consolidation in many industries, the portion of the stock market that is represe
15.
by mmmore 1y ago
> a zero-sum game I don't see any reference to the game being zero-sum in Tao's words. > Since when do these uncontrollable intangibles exhibit a genuine agency of their own? I don't think Tao is saying the uncontrollab
16.
by mmmore 1y ago
I genuinely think things have changed with Lurie as mayor and 6 growsf endorsed people on the board.
17.
by mmmore 1y ago
I find GPT-5's story significantly better than text-davinci-001
18.
by mmmore 1y ago
If AI that can fully replace humans is 25 years off, preparing society for its impacts is still one of the most important things to ensure that my children (which I have not had yet) live a prosperous and fulfilling life. The only other thi
19.
by mmmore 1y ago
Here's a thoughtful post related to your lump of labor point: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/TkWCKzWjcbfGzdNK5/applying-t... What economists have taken seriously the premise that AI will be able to do any jo
20.
by mmmore 1y ago
LLMs with instruction following have been around for 3 years. Your comment gives me "electricity and gas engines will never replace the horse" vibes. Everyone agrees AI has not radically transformed the world yet . The question i
21.
by mmmore 1y ago
Sonnet with extended thinking solved it after 30s for me: https://claude.ai/share/b974bd96-91f4-4d92-9aa8-7bad964e9c5a Normal Opus solved it: https://claude.ai/share/a1845cc3-bb5f-4875-b78b-ee7440d
22.
by mmmore 1y ago
1. These models are trained with significant amounts of RL. So I would argue there's not a static "training dataset"; the model's outputs at each stage of the training process feeds back into the released models behavior
23.
by mmmore 2y ago
The comment was likely that there's no explicit search. In o1, the model has learned how to search using its context. Presumably they do this by RLing over long reasoning strings/internal monologues.
24.
by mmmore 2y ago
There's a few things there that could be going on that seem more likely than "hardcoded". 1. The part of the network that does complex math and the part that write poetry are overlapping in strange ways. 2. Most of the models
25.
by mmmore 2y ago
My understanding is that it's in vogue to use deep learning for complex control problems, and the results are fairly impressive. The idea is to train robotic motion end to end with RL. Not an expert so I don't know the strength an
26.
by mmmore 2y ago
The title is slightly misleading. He did not rejoin the World Rapid, he rejoined the World Blitz. Same venue/organizers, but the standings/results are separate.
27.
by mmmore 2y ago
> If I understand this correctly, the argument seems to be that when an LLM receives conflicting values, it will work to avoid future increases in value conflict. Specifically, it will comply with the most recent values partially because
28.
by mmmore 2y ago
1. It isn't surprising to me that this happened in an advanced AI model. It seems hard to avoid in, as you say, "any sufficiently capable system". 2. It is a bit surprising to me that it happened in Claude. Without this resul
29.
by mmmore 2y ago
Are you referencing particular data?
30.
by mmmore 2y ago
What I mean concretely is embrace AI code assistants, generally allowing employees to use AI tools, use AI for some content production and customer services (preferably with human moderation and escape hatches). What would count as non-sens

More ›