whimsicalism

5 ms·

1.
by whimsicalism 3d ago
The government represents the public will of the people and has democratic legitimacy. The notion that it should be more constrained than private actors seems absurd. I'm okay with taxation, pulling people over for speeding, automate
2.
by whimsicalism 3d ago
I agree that that is not a good argument. I am perfectly fine with the government having access to things, for instance taxation or armed enforcers + bodycams, that are illegal for the youtuber.
3.
by whimsicalism 3d ago
What country?
4.
by whimsicalism 3d ago
Maybe I’m a radical but I am okay with the government having capabilities that are different from what a youtuber is allowed to do.
5.
by whimsicalism 7d ago
there is definitely some generative pixel stuff in the iOS pipeline as i've noticed garbled deepdream-esque letters when zooming before
6.
by whimsicalism 7d ago
pretty sure you can get an esim in china
7.
by whimsicalism 7d ago
which countries are esims not a thing?
8.
by whimsicalism 7d ago
it is truly not obvious to you why keyboard isn’t a good analogy for LLM?
9.
by whimsicalism 7d ago
it’s much more like you come up with the premise and someone else writes the book. the released prompts for other foundational problems (like unit distance) prove that.
10.
by whimsicalism 7d ago
frankly don’t know how to reply to these sorts of comments anymore
11.
by whimsicalism 7d ago
but the researchers were also largely relying on AI
12.
by whimsicalism 8d ago
This argument proves too much. By this standard, it wouldn't have counted as copying their approach if the researchers had just fed in Levent & Buckmaster's paper verbatim as a prompt into the swarm.
13.
by whimsicalism 8d ago
If the reason that OpenAI is unable to state whether they trained on this data is because they (as policy) do not reveal whether a given member has turned on/off the "Improve the model for everyone" setting, they can at least
14.
by whimsicalism 8d ago
I agree that it is not possible to prove if any one specific conversation (or derived RL tasks) was key to solving Navier-Stokes (at least without massive resource expenditure). I don't really understand how the quantity of training da
15.
by whimsicalism 8d ago
I'm confused, your employer very directly stated that they are unable to confirm that the model was not trained on the conversations.
16.
by whimsicalism 9d ago
as the other commentator said, it's one thing if it's just variable names (opaque to reverse engineering) but the fact that it is registry keys....
17.
by whimsicalism 10d ago
i think this is an isolated demand for rigor, my way of approaching it was fine, and it is only due to the political valence of the comment i'm replying to that i got downvoted and flagged. take care
18.
by whimsicalism 10d ago
I hear what you're saying, but I don't think it really applies to a question asking for the veracity of a previously stated claim, especially when the claim is actually false. I think there is more than enough bad things the gover
19.
by whimsicalism 10d ago
I was not making an argument, just asking for any factual basis to the parent comment. I guess that is deserving of 5 downvotes. > I think they forgot about that, thank god. All the innocent citizens we sent there are still being torture
20.
by whimsicalism 10d ago
no, i just legitimately don't think this has happened
21.
by whimsicalism 14d ago
the meaning is pretty obvious - they want to train on your chats & tasks and are willing to subsidize for the privilege of doing so.
22.
by whimsicalism 19d ago
kimi already exists and yes it is more than possible. it's coming
23.
by whimsicalism 19d ago
Wasn't the whole point of not releasing because they wanted to normalize the process/concerns for future actually dangerous releases? I think the release of kimi k3 is definitely arguably dangerous, we're already seeing conse
24.
by whimsicalism 21d ago
i have no idea who that is but also i was talking about society writ large, not just music.
25.
by whimsicalism 22d ago
I disagree strongly, I think we are even better at identifying talent in the margins today and the leaps are potentially larger.
26.
by whimsicalism 22d ago
Your contention is what, that now this is no longer possible or less likely?
27.
by whimsicalism 29d ago
I think there is a big difference in mechanisms between non-linearity and non-monotonicity, but I don't have bandwidth to reply in more detail.
28.
by whimsicalism 29d ago
> And it’s not like non-meat is fine - the corn industry uses a blinding amount of water, as do almonds, etc. Switching from meat to non-meat unequivocally lowers your GHG and water footprint and there's really no room for quibbling
29.
by whimsicalism 29d ago
This is what I mean about not understanding the second order transitive labor that goes into fulfilling people's wants. Making supply chain routing software cheaper, improving it for less money → all of these things directly make the p
30.
by whimsicalism 29d ago
I think that low externality things people are willing to pay for should be presumptively allowed unless there is strong reason otherwise. We are much too involved in the 'legislating individual activities' and not nearly enough i

More ›