wanderingbort

7 ms·

1.
by wanderingbort 1y ago
Not promoting something is different than suppressing it. Censorship is active suppression. If Google was using AI to prevent independent people from accessing independent websites that would be censorship. Censorship is something that is d
2.
by wanderingbort 1y ago
There is a screenshot of his profile in the article. You can pretty easily find those projects by typing in the org and username into GitHub. This was the route to check myself before responding.
3.
by wanderingbort 1y ago
I find it easy to hold these two thoughts in my head: Some FOSS projects are unable to extract a "fair" share of the economic value their product creates. Some FOSS projects have marginal or non-existent economic value. Looking at
4.
by wanderingbort 1y ago
> Neglecting such contributions because the authors might not do it for a marketable product If you look at the other thread you sill see that I am not neglecting these contributions. I am simply not valuing them MORE than what they actu
5.
by wanderingbort 1y ago
What I meant was "the result has marginal value". What I allowed for was a "myriad of possible reasons" of which this was a subset (and not even qualified as a large subset). I agree, there is another valid subset in tho
6.
by wanderingbort 1y ago
> You make it sound like the solution is obvious. It isn't. I explicitly state there are a "myriad of possible reasons" and chose to focus on a sub-set of them (again explicitly). What I did not explicitly state was that g
7.
by wanderingbort 1y ago
I think this is the part of the article that lands poorly with me. It lacks perspective. Why couldn't the people who evaluated those skills, demonstrated through those projects, pay the author? There are a myriad of possible reasons bu
8.
by wanderingbort 1y ago
I’m happy that there was overlap between what your parents put in front of you and what you found passion in later in life. I think that story happens to many but I cannot accept a premise that it is somehow universal. The passions I found
9.
by wanderingbort 1y ago
> An MCP server is running code at user-level, it doesn't need to trick an AI into reading SSH keys, it can just....read the keys! If you go to the credited author of that attack scenario [0], you will see that the MCP server is not
10.
by wanderingbort 1y ago
I like the original construction of “Vibe Coding” [0] that I will attempt to make concise: Vibe Coding is an RECREATIONAL activity where a user and an AI collaborate on creation of some artifact AND the user accepts ALL feedback and suggest
11.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
I think it’s selection bias. Marketers are going to post the proof-of-concept that it works (if only in a small isolated scenario), algorithms are going to emphasize the more amazing “toys” this produces, over the boring rebuttals. In the e
12.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
I think I missed the mark in how I positioned it. Generally, I feel it’s my job as the parent to draw out, amplify and support their unique talents. Schools aren’t really set up to maximize unique potential so, we are using them for what th
13.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
Well, we aren’t trying to make them normal. Just using the school system to provide opportunities we cannot. Out of curiosity, did you feel as though you got stimulated in the topics you loved outside of school? We are trying hard to amplif
14.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
We chose to do the opposite. Our kids are in a school that provides excellent opportunities to build the skills they struggle with. They already pursue the things that come naturally to them. As parents, feeding those flames is easy and we
15.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
There have been a spree of recent experiments with LLMs solving logic puzzles (specifically Cheryl's Birthday). I wanted to replicate and repeat the tests from [0] with more LLMs. For reference, that article tested whether the trained
16.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
Related to this in asked LLMs to directly solve the same riddle but then obfuscated the riddle so it wouldn’t match training data and as a final test added extraneous information to distract them. Outside of o1, simple obfuscation was enoug
17.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
How do you know whether the discrete events are a more fundamental representation vs a higher level representation that your training and discipline produces?
18.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
> Release the data, and if it ends up causing a privacy scandal... We can't prove that a model like llama will never produce a segment of its training data set verbatim. Any potential privacy scandal is already in motion. My cynical
19.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
This seems more of a concern for foundational models rather than personalization. Any pressure you feel to adopt python is not because it has detected you enjoy python, it’s because it’s global training data skewed to python. Its a huge con
20.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
This seems fundamentally different. Filter bubbles show you more of the externally generated content you engage with. These personalizations are trying to predict the content you generate. While it may serve as a ballast for your personal
21.
by wanderingbort 2y ago
I think it is correct to include practical implementation costs in the selection. Theoretical efficacy doesn’t guarantee real world efficacy. I accept that this is self reinforcing but I favor real gains today over potentially larger gains
22.
by wanderingbort 3y ago
> It just means you may have to roll up your sleeves and help create the community you want. Citation needed. There are so many of these small towns that are hurting surely, you can find a single example or anecdote that backs up the cla
23.
by wanderingbort 3y ago
I see releases like this so often these days. I am early in my journey but I’m stumbling on the basic structure of these models. Is this structurally a vanilla transformer (or encoder/decoder) with tweaks to the tokenizer, the loss fun
24.
by wanderingbort 3y ago
Mitigating risk is covered in the cost reduction side. Yes the C-Suite is thinking about and mitigating risk. They probably know the exact number for a given class of risk in terms of current mitigation costs. You have to beat that by a mar
25.
by wanderingbort 3y ago
It’s not too much to hope that HME reduces those compliance costs. However, I believe it is too much to assume there will be any material adoption before it can demonstrate that reduction. Reduction of trust is not a value add, it is a cost
26.
by wanderingbort 3y ago
How do you know that the bouncers scanning machine didn’t log the interaction? The whole value prop is built on not trusting that bouncer and by extension their hardware. Everything would have to be encrypted leading to the bouncer also nee
27.
by wanderingbort 3y ago
You can say it’s insufficient but it is what it costs them today. I guess the better comparison is that cost in a financial statement plus some expected increase in revenue due to a “better” product. Again, I think you are correct in your a
28.
by wanderingbort 3y ago
If it’s just that the parties don’t trust each other then the cost of HME has to be compared to the current “state of the art” which is contracts and enforcement thereof. In practice, I don’t think those costs are that high because the rate
29.
by wanderingbort 3y ago
Why is that preferable over a message attesting “over 21” signed by the DMV? The hard parts here are retrofitting society to use a digital ID and how to prove that the human in front of you is attached to that digital ID. The solutions the
30.
by wanderingbort 3y ago
OP_RETURN is still used in some over-the-top protocols on Bitcoin however, using Pay-to-script-hash (P2SH) after Taproot has much better economics and a larger per-transaction payload limit. The downside is that they are two-phase. A user

More ›