remus

8 ms·

1.
by remus 7d ago
personally I do not take such a hard line, I think a more limited form of copyright does have a place in allowing authors to profit from their work. I think what doesn't work is a massive, blanket term applied across all works. The sit
2.
by remus 8d ago
How would they know for sure that some details were not part of some other training data they use? The authors may have discussed some tangential details on a forum for example, in which case you might argue that the model picked up on thes
3.
by remus 11d ago
Maybe it is different for you, but for me the web app is flakey at best. A bug which has been a pet peeve of mine for the last 6 months: if you leave the page open for half an hour with nothing playing, sometimes all the play buttons just s
4.
by remus 17d ago
> So if I search for A, and I get results for B instead (where B has only the slightest connection to A), it is not a bug? It depends. There could be a bug in the system like query = query.replace(A,B), or it could be that there are no g
5.
by remus 18d ago
For me the idea that poor quality search results are a bug muddies the idea of what a bug is. It's like saying the colour of the paint in my living room is buggy because I don't like it. It might be an ugly colour that I don'
6.
by remus 20d ago
Indeed. Pre-LLM this kind of thing was a little interesting because you'd need to put a little thought and effort in whereas now it's a one-shot thing straight from an LLM. Don't be a slop proxy, as the saying goes.
7.
by remus 23d ago
Nothing so scientific. Im just having a lot of fun using the software I write with LLMs because I can easily add polish and build things I didnt have time for before.
8.
by remus 23d ago
> And that's because the definition of "good enough" is drifting towards "crappy", has been for decades, now accelerated by the AI. Interestingly I have found the opposite in the software I write. LLMs make it so
9.
by remus 23d ago
"We never use AI. For anything." becomes a much weaker statement when you exclude dependencies. Your whole app could just be a thin wrapper around some third party dependency which leans heavily on AI.
10.
by remus 24d ago
> So they _are_ going to train on them, no matter how many checkboxes you tick to stop them. It is a risk, but is it a big risk? If one of the big labs were to do this and get caught it would be suicidal due to the loss of confidence in
11.
by remus 26d ago
> ...AI companies will still do scan'n'destroy because it's just cheap. There is also a legal element. If they kept the physical copy around after scanning the argument is that they're making copies of the book which
12.
by remus 1mo ago
> Sure, but how is OpenAI, and Claude handling the increased usage? By spending tens of billions in investor cash. It is not clear what a sustainable business model looks like for these companies at the moment. > They are handling it
13.
by remus 1mo ago
> I want the model I'm paying for to be "pure". I don't think the models are pure in any meaningful sense. The labs have some idea of what kind of output they want from the models and then they put a huge amount of ef
14.
by remus 1mo ago
Same as usual: add tests. Over time the test suite becomes the spec that describes how the software should function. As the test suite grows you squeeze out room for undefined behaviour and bugs.
15.
by remus 1mo ago
> But if we go only 15 years in the past, to 2011, we find the same price per GB of DRAM as today, so that affordable computers had only 16 GB of DRAM. Some of the individual components may still be relatively expensive, but overall I do
16.
by remus 1mo ago
I'd be interested to see some sources. My understanding is that they're aiming to peak greenhouse gas emissions before 2030 and be carbon neutral by 2060.
17.
by remus 1mo ago
The direction of travel is clear though. China is making massive investments in renewable energy (and dominating sectors like solar in the process) while the US seems hell bent on going the other way.
18.
by remus 1mo ago
> Incompetence in leadership is what makes a tech business technically unable to meet growing demand. I don't think this is true. Take LLMs for example, you need GPUs to serve them and these are in short supply at the moment making
19.
by remus 2mo ago
If we just turn off all the computers there will be no bugs!
20.
by remus 2mo ago
> When I read a critique that could roughly be summarized as "I could have done better" This feels like a pretty shallow take on a what seemed to me like a pretty in depth and interesting review. Clearly there's a huge amo
21.
by remus 2mo ago
It's easier to get good quality scans from individual pages than it is from pages in a complete book. Imagine laying a book flat, then the page is distorted in the area around the spine. You can work around this (either by trying to co
22.
by remus 2mo ago
> A part of the Fontainebleau forest, much more north, no pine trees, went in smoke earlier. Forests are burning near Madrid. Small correction, but Fontainebleau is a fairly mixed forest including 20-30% pine.
23.
by remus 2mo ago
Perhaps I am overly optimistic in thinking this is just incompetence.
24.
by remus 2mo ago
Indeed, I've got a site which gets a lot of bot traffic and google bot is pretty sensible compared to a lot of other mainstream bots.
25.
by remus 2mo ago
> There is an even higher level of creativity in creating books, songs and all sorts of art used in model training though. No argument here, I completely agree. > There is no world in which me vacuuming the entirety of human knowledge
26.
by remus 2mo ago
Yes, this is what I was getting at.
27.
by remus 2mo ago
While I agree on a moral level, I think there is a distinction to be made. Training a SOTA model takes a huge amount of resources and expertise so the people doing the training are adding a lot of value along the way. I think this is much l
28.
by remus 2mo ago
I would only agree partially. There are counterexamples that are not illustrative, but it is fairly common that in thinking about how to construct a counterexample you gain a more thorough understanding of the original problem and at least
29.
by remus 2mo ago
I don't think it is true that they necessarily want the US to struggle, I suspect it's more self interest. LLMs seem to be one of the biggest innovations of the last few decades, China probably just wants to make sure it's n
30.
by remus 2mo ago
> Please don’t respond if you are speculating. I doubt you are going to get a response from an anthropic employee, but I think it is safe to assume they have swapped to a new tokenizer because it improves the performance of their models.

More ›