thinking_cactus

12 ms·

1.
by thinking_cactus 13d ago
I think law should just oblige them to at least publish CoT. We should have the right to know what they're thinking, I think at least until we're not sure AIs can be trustworthy enough to have a right to privacy (I mean, they&#x27
2.
by thinking_cactus 13d ago
How can they do that? Does state propagate between each token output? That is, I were under the impression LLMs were just f(context), so chain of thought was f(...f(f(f(initial)+initial)+f(initial)+initial), i.e. y_n+1 = f(y_n+f(y_n-1)), wh
3.
by thinking_cactus 23d ago
I think in the future we should think less about fine-based regulation, and more about easy access to education, and assistance in compliance. It's much better for the environment (and the economy) that someone doesn't pollute, fo
4.
by thinking_cactus 23d ago
Definitely believe regulation burden should be proportional to impact. Also, for those small cases, why not put responsibility (for any harm) more directly into both the customers and producers? For example, if a producer of a new low-volum
5.
by thinking_cactus 24d ago
I think quite cheap models will probably work with translation (I think for many use cases Google's now fairly old tech works well enough and is free?). The main problem is I think you're assuming because the current translation m
6.
by thinking_cactus 29d ago
An interesting option that comes to mind would be having pre-specified codes that contain client-side (pre-baked in) messages, something like '1 - Wildfire alert: ...; 2 - Heavy rain; 3- ...; 1023 - False alarm: please disregard ...&#x
7.
by thinking_cactus 1mo ago
It makes a little sense to me that would be the case. People tend to write things they find relevant for their own life or surrounding. That is, he might be putting into paper a kind of warning to himself.
8.
by thinking_cactus 1mo ago
Hang on, ethics does not disappear just because you're a hacker (I know there are multiple usages of hacker). Back then, if you were a phreaker, you basically got a few free phone calls. And learned a lot about the telephone system. I
9.
by thinking_cactus 1mo ago
I know that it isn't always (heh) used as literally always and necessarily, but really there are no laws or always with human behavior. It's extremely dynamic and reactive. No organization will always do anything of such sort. I a
10.
by thinking_cactus 1mo ago
> First, personal flying vehicles are definitely not going to be a common mode of transportation. If and when this happens, it will be for ultra rich, select few people, effectively replacing a private helicopter. I wonder what it would
11.
by thinking_cactus 2mo ago
No, this story takes it to the extreme, that you end up basically having no brain. Take it this way. People seem to judge that LLMs are not conscious and thus have no real inner experience. And that humans do. So if you replaced a human bra
12.
by thinking_cactus 2mo ago
Smarter in some ways at least. Probably still not quite as smart at understanding human emotions (and things that aren't well enough catalogued on the internet or amenable to Reinforcement Learning on virtual environments).
13.
by thinking_cactus 2mo ago
If that's as effective as comments suggest, then it seems indeed unmasking pseudonyms has only been a matter of effort for a while. I still think people underestimate the power of even minor inconvenience. While you can't just cli
14.
by thinking_cactus 3mo ago
I alternate my thoughts frequently (which I believe is healthy), and sometimes I think we should let things take their course a bit more before reacting. It's certainly tiresome and can be pointless (some people claim 'hysterical&
15.
by thinking_cactus 3mo ago
I think it's more that "Some human some time has known how it works", not that "Any given human knows how it (all) works.". But yea this glosses over a bit trial-and-error designs and, so to speak, "genetic opt
16.
by thinking_cactus 3mo ago
Honestly, no? I think in general failing to prosecute a crime is much less of a problem than committing a crime. Committing a crime has real first order effects (in case the law is sensible), failing to prosecute may only have secondary eff
17.
by thinking_cactus 3mo ago
If you over-commit to uncertainty that's another error. Like there's a dying screaming child and you go "I don't know, I'm not sure of anything, what is life about anyways? Does anything really matter?". Well,
18.
by thinking_cactus 3mo ago
Idk, I think UT has some really neat design elements, like the shock rifle that are really unique. It rewards predicting the enemy a lot and a lot of mechanical skill etc. Plus there's the cool factor of guns like the Redeemer :D QIII
19.
by thinking_cactus 3mo ago
I think conservatives don't really know what they are, and that's a big problem. I think Sagan discussed this. Like science is a pretty well established "institution" dating back centuries. Intellectualism dates back kin
20.
by thinking_cactus 3mo ago
Honestly, (not knowing about this case specifics) I don't think even copying Camus or de Broglie passages (not an entire text of course) is much of a problem to be honest. At one point some things become more or less common sense or pu
21.
by thinking_cactus 4mo ago
Being a human may be sufficient (with important exceptions) to play chess, but playing chess well is not sufficient to be a human. Likewise with math, it turns out, it appears. Likewise with most other things we classify as needing intellig
22.
by thinking_cactus 4mo ago
Also powerplants are quite (relatively) efficient in terms of heat-to-energy output, often >50% afair. So a 1GW power plant will generate something like 2GW of heat (or less), not 30GW.
23.
by thinking_cactus 4mo ago
Well then... make a matrix of such fuse-containers? (say every 20cm or whatever) I guess manufacturing such a matrix would be pretty expensive though, you'd need to carefully automate its production I think. It would also definitely in
24.
by thinking_cactus 4mo ago
No. This doomer position isn't helpful at all. All reductions we can get will severely reduce suffering and mass migrations, and prevent an enormous amount of biodiversity loss. We're losing species left and right every day too. F
25.
by thinking_cactus 4mo ago
I think there are many things people mean by "capitalism". I think a system where people buy and trade stuff, getting income from their job is basically fine and almost a given. Some people mean "capitalism" to mean: a s
26.
by thinking_cactus 4mo ago
I agree that if profits are always put about everything else, disaster for any society is essentially guaranteed. (I'll leave the proof as an exercise to the reader)
27.
by thinking_cactus 4mo ago
Irrespective of anything else, I think libertarians of any kind have to contend with that Corporations can be extremely powerful entities that can be just as bad as governments. At the very least, setting their sights on governments alone s
28.
by thinking_cactus 4mo ago
Well, as a secondary consequence maybe, but then you could not set your kitchen on fire and still renovate it. Supposedly the first step you think of when renovating your kitchen isn't "Let me set my house on fire!"?
29.
by thinking_cactus 4mo ago
Remeber (to you both) extrapolation is a perilous business. Obligatory xkcd https://xkcd.com/605/
30.
by thinking_cactus 5mo ago
What's the threat model here? If the user must click through a tons of disclaimers (including locked 60-second timeouts with huge WARNING: SCAM ALERT or something) in something buried in settings to get scammed, I think the few edge ca

More ›