proto-n

5 ms·

1.
by proto-n 2mo ago
yeah well, both the doomers and the "pr stunt" folks are right - openai wanted to prove, as a pr stunt, that they have a dangerous weapon - openai proved (as a pr stunt), that they do indeed have a dangerous weapon
2.
by proto-n 7mo ago
From Gemini pro: You should definitely ride the elephant (or at least lead it there)! Here is the logic: If you walk there by yourself, you will arrive at the creek, but the dirty elephant will still be 300 feet back where you started. You
3.
by proto-n 9mo ago
1. "Suspected" is just that, suspected, you can't penalize papers based on your gut feel 2. LLM-s are a tool, and there's nothing wrong with using them unless you misuse them
4.
by proto-n 11mo ago
Well, one of these is something that most reaonable people work on avoiding, while the other is something that a huge capitalist industrial machine is working to achieve like their existence depends on it.
5.
by proto-n 1y ago
And along similar lines, "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."
6.
by proto-n 1y ago
I really don't see why it's not possible to just use basically a "highlighter" token which is added to all the authoritative instructions and not to data. Should be very fast for the model to learn it during rlhf or simi
7.
by proto-n 1y ago
Not exactly. You can't steal anything unless the person revealed the public key. Addresses are just hashes of public keys, therefore qc resistant. However, you can't ever reuse an address, as signing reveals the public key. Otoh,
8.
by proto-n 2y ago
I still disagree. It's more like "omg I should have published at least a few papers by now, what am I doing" and then you start frantically looking for provable things in the dataset. You find one that you can also support wi
9.
by proto-n 2y ago
It's really not that hard to come up with ways to commit fraud if you want to. On the other hand, it's very easy to make such mistakes if you don't know to avoid them. This characterization is very misguided IMO.
10.
by proto-n 2y ago
Not only common, it's become a requirement to review papers if you submit one yourself. Yeah it's not ideal for multiple reasons (what you said + prompt engineering grad students dismissing proper papers without having the slighes
11.
by proto-n 2y ago
"For the first time, researchers reading conference proceedings will be forced to wonder: does this work truly merit my attention? Or is its publication simply the result of fraud? [...] But the mere possibility that any given paper wa
12.
by proto-n 2y ago
The "so called Long COVID" really just means "I got covid and I remain unwell in some way, long term". I'm not sure it needs to be questioned if those two qualifying things are given. Very well might be the same thi
13.
by proto-n 2y ago
(Wasn't me claiming that, read usernames) Yeah, but you are, at least seemingly, missing the point: the scripts he was referring to in context weren't the legal disclosures but the sales tricks that were handed to them to use. He
14.
by proto-n 2y ago
The article states that he was fired because the company had financial problems, and not reading the required stuff was used as an excuse
15.
by proto-n 2y ago
But then this is also an argument against spontaneous emergence of life, right? Sicne mirror-life could just emerge on its own, instead of evolving from regular life.
16.
by proto-n 2y ago
It seems you only want to call MVC frameworks frameworks? But there's millions of other types of frameworks for thousands of purposes. Framework is a generic term (for which the definition is usually the calls into you/you call in
17.
by proto-n 2y ago
Usually means uncertainty quantification
18.
by proto-n 2y ago
I really really hope you are a better judge of that than I am
19.
by proto-n 2y ago
Now this one makes more sense. Chemistry Nobel for advancing chemistry using AI. Contrast that with Phyics Nobel for advancing AI using physics.
20.
by proto-n 2y ago
I'm not sure forking the repo would create a forked version of the 'software' if the fork's sole purpose is to develop a pull request. But I guess it's somewhat ambiguous langauge, and better safe then sorry when it
21.
by proto-n 2y ago
The same way any other illness is, I guess
22.
by proto-n 2y ago
To my (totally uninformed) eyes it looks like maybe this could count as a SLAPP suit [1], in which case there's a possbility for a counterclaim for legal costs. However, Massachusetts apparently has "much weaker anti-SLAPP laws&qu
23.
by proto-n 2y ago
I took the quote [1] to basically mean "we might think this is a nuclear warhead, but in fact it is not, rather it is some kind of random test object used to demonstrate the software". Obscure part of a washing mashine, random geo
24.
by proto-n 2y ago
He later finds basically the same object with the caption "The multiple components of a nuclear weapon body are highlighted in this intentionally simplified mesh" from another publication of Sandia, making that theory kind of unli
25.
by proto-n 3y ago
See for example GitHub's statement [1] about no longer displaying a cookie banner. While ironically the blog still does display them, the main site doesn't. [1] https://github.blog/2020-12-17-no-cookie-for-you&#x2F
26.
by proto-n 3y ago
Blogspot is google's blogging platform
27.
by proto-n 3y ago
Yeah well in bash I can do it in one line: `python train.py`. I hate examples like this, the 50loc statement is totally useless (and so is the code example, as I can't learning anything from it).
28.
by proto-n 3y ago
Your argument about marijuana being easier to prove is a very bad scenario, regardless of how common it is/used to be. By the same logic why not make it illegal to wear socks, it would provide reason for the system to punish anybody th
29.
by proto-n 3y ago
Well, I doubt anyone expects 8 billion people to be able to live on mars in the coming years
30.
by proto-n 3y ago
"(was) left in the dark" means "wasn't given information"

More ›