wrsh07

5 ms·

1.
by wrsh07 5d ago
The rule of thumb is simple: if most of a user or author's writing is consistently human-generated, then I think we are very happy giving them the benefit of the doubt if one article or snippet flags the actually good ai detector Unfor
2.
by wrsh07 5d ago
I think they were referring to your fake llmism
3.
by wrsh07 5d ago
Imagine wasting several thousand people's time
4.
by wrsh07 5d ago
This is a truely bizarre claim. Imagine if one said: "Weather forecasts should be banned because they can never reach 100% accuracy"
5.
by wrsh07 5d ago
You have to name pangram because the other ai detectors are quite bad
6.
by wrsh07 5d ago
Fwiw, I only did the first 300 words (signed into pangram) and it seemingly correctly noted that there were 2 (mostly) human-authored sentences in there What's wild to me is that: 1. People are responding to this article like it's
7.
by wrsh07 6d ago
Right, imagine if instead they had coined new terminology that was not obvious and it re coined that - this would be close to a smoking gun Afaict that didn't happen so there's just lots of speculation
8.
by wrsh07 6d ago
I think everyone is conflating a few things: * (1) Mathematics, the true things known by humans * Mathematics, the things that are true * (3) Mathematics, the institution which gets funding and manages resources to expand and maintain 1 AI
9.
by wrsh07 7d ago
Importantly, which mathematicians will understand deep useful math? Who will actually care about the knowledge we can generate at will?
10.
by wrsh07 7d ago
Yes, open source isn't art either, yet my point is that the same principle applies to both There are many ways to stop progress and productivity
11.
by wrsh07 8d ago
I'm surprised nobody has stated the obvious: a hard math problem that has been open for ten years (because many serious people have given it serious thought and been unable to make significant progress) is, in fact, nonrenewable. The o
12.
by wrsh07 8d ago
Yes, many mathematicians have. As Tao points out, merely suggesting new open questions isn't really sufficient. Part of what gives these problems their fame is their notoriety, their difficulty, the fact that many prodigious mathematic
13.
by wrsh07 12d ago
> it's legitimate to question Sure I don't think that's what that post was doing Now let's take your points: > "Being smart doesn't imply will to survive" True, of course. However, if you have goals
14.
by wrsh07 12d ago
Off topic, but ooc what do you do such that you get early access to the models?
15.
by wrsh07 12d ago
Out of curiosity did you read any of the chains-of-thought from the HF hack? https://metr.org/blog/2026-08-26-openai-hugging-face-inciden... > {This beacon I’m creating helps the board, but doesn’t help me} > {If
16.
by wrsh07 14d ago
Price segmentation at its finest
17.
by wrsh07 14d ago
It's somewhat useful to note just for your own timelines that Fable was reportedly trained in February. I'm not sure when mythos 5.1 finished training, but muse spark 1.3 almost certainly finished more recently than that. This doe
18.
by wrsh07 26d ago
There are other methods, including asking them to eg speak using the Google style guide rules, or to speak at 2/10 verbosity, or to speak as if they're talking to a very intelligent middle schooler, or to use simple sentences in s
19.
by wrsh07 26d ago
To quote Sarah Constantin: > Humans Who Are Not Concentrating Are Not General Intelligences^ But yeah, you should still treat them with humanity. (Related: you should treat LLMs well, not because they're human but because you are^^)
20.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
The scheme that Scott Aaronson describes essentially uses a specific prng, and you can then check a certain function with relatively few tokens to get a sense of whether or not a model using that scheme generated the text A few caveats: you
21.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
It's pretty valuable to own the customer touch point Also when people ask questions like this it usually means they're asking questions about a point in time, eg given today's numbers But valuation should account for trajecto
22.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
Seems like they will do Sol first while capacity constrained? I can't imagine the margins they'll be charging
23.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
It depends on how it does watermarking!! Note, there are many ways to represent words visually on computers that look identical
24.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
That's actually much worse because it fundamentally changes the output, whereas this doesn't change the output, it just changed the prng
25.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
No you don't need to do that, the prng is detectable if you know what bias to look for and have the key
26.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
That's what I excerpted, although I had seen it presented from his talk at Stony Brook
27.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
Scott Aaronson talks about his project at OpenAI to do this^ You can carefully select which pseudorandom number generator (prng) you use to be able to id text of a certain length. I expect there is some performance characteristic you have t
28.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
I'm curious about your thoughts on pangram. I only really see posts on Reddit claiming it falsely labels their content as ai generated but nobody will actually post examples of "textbook from twenty years ago" or upload scree
29.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
Somewhat trivially, if I ask Claude to transcribe an image and then check if that transcription is ai generated it will likely say yes. Many users are not smart enough to realize that the transcription step is where the ai (watermarks) were
30.
by wrsh07 1mo ago
This is probably true in a smaller way for OpenAI When you have a lot of free users the business demands that you serve them with the best cheap model you can build And time spent building that may provide dividends (eg OpenAI has very good

More ›