thethirdone

24 ms·

1.
by thethirdone 5mo ago
> To be fair, TurboQuant is also a purely theoretical paper. I just wanted to get this out and share. TurboQuant is not a purely theoretical paper. Section 4 "Experiments" (page 15) [0] has a bunch of figure based on actual GPU
2.
by thethirdone 5mo ago
Yeah, for me Claude identified the phrase "this holds with probability 1 over random weight matrices since the null space has dimension" Treating trained weights as random for the purpose of a proof is immediately discrediting for
3.
by thethirdone 5mo ago
> the ratio remains approximately 914x over TurboQuant, with compression improving rather than degrading as context length grows. This line from the abstract got me really suspicious. Obviously a compression scheme that incorporates the
4.
by thethirdone 6mo ago
The grid is not all energy use. To get the numbers on an even playing field you need to compensate for that only ~40% of energy goes through the grid. And that leaves a 6:1 ratio assuming projections run true. It very well might be possible
5.
by thethirdone 6mo ago
> Also, I'm not sure about your math. 4% would be 4% of the whole like in a pie chart, not 4% of the remainder after removing one slice. 4% AI, 30% transportation, 66% other. I don't know where that 40% is from. 40% is for ener
6.
by thethirdone 6mo ago
Compare that to ~30% of all energy use for transportation. So approximately 40%*4% = 1.6% vs 30%. I find your correction to be more wrong that the initial statement. > And most of that new capacity will be natural gas. That increase woul
7.
by thethirdone 6mo ago
I agree that the movements look quite robotic (though not as much as you might expect), but I don't think any movies have depicted robots moving like that. A much more common depiction is moving only a single joint at a time. > Shar
8.
by thethirdone 7mo ago
You would not. You don't normally post lots of comments. The occasional return after a long period of inactivity is not in itself suspicious.
9.
by thethirdone 8mo ago
The d suffix makes it not compile under clang. The PRs seem like mostly small changes that are clear improvements.
10.
by thethirdone 8mo ago
The criteria were laid out in 2019 [0]. It was less clear then. > If you are a "rustacean" and feel that Rust already meets the preconditions listed above, and that SQLite should be recoded in Rust, then you are welcomed and en
11.
Can AI Pass Freshman CS? [video](youtube.com)
3 points by thethirdone 8mo ago|1 comments
12.
by thethirdone 8mo ago
Based on Table 1: This method is actually worse than generating a random number (0-100% independent of the program) and testing if it is less than 98.8%. That would achieve a better detection rate without increasing the false positive rate.
13.
by thethirdone 8mo ago
I have seen many people try to use Claude Code and get LOTS of bugs. Show me any > 10k project you have made with it and I will put the effort in to find one bug free of charge.
14.
by thethirdone 8mo ago
Which ones of those have been achieved in your opinion? I think the arbitrary proofs from mathematical literature is probably the most solved one. Research into IMO problems, and Lean formalization work have been pretty successful. Then, pr
15.
Radiance Meshes for Volumetric Reconstruction(half-potato.gitlab.io)
11 points by thethirdone 9mo ago|0 comments
16.
by thethirdone 9mo ago
You did not actually address the core of my points at all. > It isn't a case of ratio it is a fundamentally different method of working hence my point of not needing all human literary output do the the equivalent of an LLM. You can
17.
by thethirdone 9mo ago
> The simplest example being that LLM's somehow function in a similar fashion to human brains. They categorically do not. I do not have most all of human literary output in my head and yet I can coherently write this sentence. The r
18.
by thethirdone 10mo ago
I would hope god can do better than 40% on a test. If you select experts from the relevant fields humans, they together would get a passing grade (70%) at least. A group of 20 humans is not godlike.
19.
by thethirdone 10mo ago
I disagree with the framing in 2.1 a lot. > Models look god-tier on paper: > they pass exams > solve benchmark coding tasks > reach crazy scores on reasoning evals Models don't look "god-tier" from
20.
by thethirdone 10mo ago
In this paper both the diffusion and the auto-regressive models are transformers with O(n^2) performance for long sequences. They share the "Exact KV Cache" for committed tokens. Diffusion just allows you to spend more compute at
21.
by thethirdone 11mo ago
Its not clear to me this is an actual problem. I just actually googled "how to fix a Git conflict" and not a single one has multiple paragraphs describing what things are. The first result [0] pretty much immediately drops into wh
22.
by thethirdone 1y ago
Do you actually disagree with the "minutiae was always borderline irrelevant" part or that it comes along with "making somebody money"? I pretty strongly agree with the original quote including the "possibly with so
23.
by thethirdone 1y ago
There is a long history of people thinking humans are special and better than animals / technology. For animals, people actually thought animals can't feel pain and did not even consider the ways in which they might be cognitively
24.
by thethirdone 1y ago
The first iteration vectorized with numpy is the best solution imho. The only additional optimization is using modulo 9 to give you a sum of digits mod 9; that should filter out approximately 1/9th of numbers. The digit summing is the
25.
by thethirdone 1y ago
What "O(1)-state shuffle" could you possibly be talking about? It takes `O(nlogn)` space to store a permutation of list of length n. Any smaller and some permutations will be unrepresentable. I am very aware of this because shuffl
26.
by thethirdone 1y ago
Advising the opposite to humans does not make sense. 13 words is already tiny to convince someone. The choices I was thinking were restricting LLM word count and increasing human word count. The goal is specifically to make them more compar
27.
by thethirdone 1y ago
I'm not sure what effect you think I want. The suggestion was just to increase the "interestingness" of the study. It seems to be like the main difference between LLM and human shown was length of response. Controlling for th
28.
by thethirdone 1y ago
Sure. I am not contesting that LLMs are more persuasive in this context. That basic result comes through very clearly in the paper. Its not as clear how relevant this is to other situations though. I think its quite likely that humans given
29.
by thethirdone 1y ago
Based on the data in table 3, I would attribute most of the difference to length of advice. LLMs average word count (29.4) is more than double human word count (13.25). Most other measures do not have a significant ratio. "Difficult wo
30.
by thethirdone 1y ago
The study is testing a very specific type of "recognizing shapes"; which the title of the article calls "geometric regularity". The "background stimuli" are shapes that crows would be expected to be able to dis

More ›