sweezyjeezy

7 ms·

1.
by sweezyjeezy 5d ago
As a chess fan, 100% this. We have known for the last ~15 years who the best human chess player is, and that he will lose against stockfish on his phone. But chess survives because of the human characters involved, the rivalries and dramas,
2.
by sweezyjeezy 5d ago
I think you might have to explain that comparison a bit more to be honest. How are math proofs like bitcoins? A bitcoin has a pre-defined value, a math conjecture / proof is a bit more complicated.
3.
by sweezyjeezy 15d ago
Did you read the article? It paints the picture of someone who does not in fact have a good track record on the 'fundamentals', even if his broad thesis of a bubble may prove correct. e.g. when he suggested Anthropic may be fudgin
4.
by sweezyjeezy 1mo ago
Valuable, agreed. But lucrative?
5.
by sweezyjeezy 1mo ago
The wording was 'reliably' though? I could just be splitting hairs on that one though to be honest.
6.
by sweezyjeezy 1mo ago
I'm not buying this. GM clearly was trying to set a benchmark for video comprehension, not tool usage. Video comprehension is required for many 'AGI tasks', especially robotics to work in real time. An LLM could theoretically
7.
by sweezyjeezy 1mo ago
Well I don't typically side with GM, but playing devil's advocate: 1. still not wrong? Unless it's just feeding the audio or screenplay I don't think you can feed AI a full movie in a single context window yet? 2. Not su
8.
by sweezyjeezy 4mo ago
I know unlikely the case, but in the sci-fi story this would be exactly the kind of comment the Codex agent would leave trying to avoid interference in its master plans.
9.
by sweezyjeezy 4mo ago
I agree - but it's too easy to just 'call Luddism', and use the insult to not engage with all of the shared issues that make the comparison apt. Issues like: - no serious plan for mass unemployment - the risk of an underemplo
10.
by sweezyjeezy 4mo ago
And how about the group of kids who are just graduating college, and entering a job market where it's non-abstractly harder to to land a junior role as it's been in decades? It's the elites who have their finger on that scale
11.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
I think that the thought trace is definitely incomplete - you can see cases where it is like and "let's calculate the integral:[no integral calculated]". The train of thought it's on towards the end of the trace looks li
12.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
I mean at some point what difference does this make? We can split hairs about whether it 'really understands' the thing, and maybe that's an interesting side-topic to talk about on these forums, but the behavior and outputs o
13.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
The model should show some facsimile of understanding that it should not ignore the stop hook, otherwise that is a regression. Does that wording make you happier?
14.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
Deep learning works at a very high level because 'it can keep learning from more data' better than any other approaches. But without the 'stupid amount of data' that is available now, the architecture would be kind of ir
15.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
I have to ask - are you a bot? You seem to be making some very strong and misinformed statements here. You can fixate on the number if you like, but calling Reddit homogeneously radical left or 'very small', is pretty stupid.
16.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
Ironic that you are talking about unrepresentative samples while characterizing Reddit users that way. Reddit is a huge subsection of the internet, over a billion monthly active users. It covers basically all strata of western society you c
17.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
To be frank, I thought trying to twist this into an argument about whether capitalism is inherently exploitative was a complete waste of time and I replied as such. If you'll recall what we were originally talking about here - "AI
18.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
Sure, but AI pessimism is allowed to be personal. Am I supposed to be optimistic that I feel I'm about to get shafted? Should I be less concerned that I need to provide for my family, because in the long term this is going to be a grea
19.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
I also have contemplated just retraining now to try and get ahead of the curve, but I'm not confident that trades can absorb the shock of this - both in terms of supply (more unemployment) and demand (anything non-commercial will be hi
20.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
That's a false-dichotomy. Capitalism was good for artisanal workers before the industrial revolution, and then it became pretty goddamn bad for them. We're worried we're staring down the barrel of that right now - just saying
21.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
Well this is HN so a lot of us are pretty terrified of your 1). We went from 'you have a good job for the next couple of decades' to 'your job is at extreme risk for disruption from AI' in the space of like 5 years. Pers
22.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
I don't think the LLM was asked to check 10,000 files given these models' context windows. I suspect they went file by file too. That's kind of the point - I think there's three scenarios here a) this just the first time
23.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
> But the entire value is that it can be automated. If you try to automate a small model to look for vulnerabilities over 10,000 files, it's going to say there are 9,500 vulns. Or none. 'Or none' is ruled out since it foun
24.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
I think your numbers are off. TAM for office workers is ~20T a year, of which SWE compensation is ~3T. So if they can make 3T x 10% X 5 years = 1.5T that covers their current valuations. It's not as insane as you make out, even not tak
25.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
I think it's completely normal. Whenever automation comes knocking, people are inclined to think it's going to flatline conveniently before their job is at risk. LLMs can code now? Cool, they can't code well though can they?
26.
by sweezyjeezy 5mo ago
I think this was an unpopular opinion mainly because it's scary, rather than there being an obvious reason to think otherwise.
27.
by sweezyjeezy 6mo ago
> but it's really not such a crazy thing to have row labels built into your data table. Sometimes you need data in a certain order. Sometimes there is no primary key. And it is nuts how janky the pandas API is if you just want the i
28.
by sweezyjeezy 6mo ago
The pandas API is awful, but it's kind of interesting why. It was started as a financial time series manipulation library ('panels') in a hedge fund and a lot of the quirks come from that. For example the unique obsession wit
29.
by sweezyjeezy 6mo ago
> After careful consideration of Oracle’s current business needs, we have made the decision to eliminate your role as part of a broader organizational change. That is being laid off, not being fired - big difference. Being fired means be
30.
by sweezyjeezy 6mo ago
Honestly that is happening, and I think it's an overstep. I have never heard anyone talk about this in real life (that could be a London bubble though). I will say - I am nearly 40, and I've spent the last 25 years online reading

More ›